Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Telemed J E Health ; 29(8): 1195-1202, 2023 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36637801

ABSTRACT

Purpose: To assess the effectiveness and financial implications of employing a telehealth physician extender program to re-engage patients with diabetic retinopathy (DR) who are lost to follow-up (LTF). Methods: Established patients with DR unevaluated in the prior 12 months were identified as LTF, and randomized to receive a recall intervention or standard operating procedure (SOP). For the intervention, a telehealth physician extender performed outbound calls, offering each patient a symptom screening questionnaire following a physician-directed escalation pathway and assistance in scheduling a return appointment. All patients retained the ability to schedule an appointment by means of SOP. Appointment schedule and adherence rates were assessed 30 days after a 6-week intervention period. Call times were digitally measured to estimate intervention labor cost. Results: Four hundred twenty-five of 2,514 established patients with DR were LTF (17%). One hundred fifty-seven patients were assigned to the intervention group; the remaining 268 formed the SOP group. Sixty-six outbound calls reached patients (42%). At the time of program assessment, the intervention group demonstrated a higher rate of appointment scheduling (31% vs. 14%, p < 0.001) and adherence (14% vs. 7%, p = 0.020). The measured call duration was 2.3 ± 1.9 min, yielding an estimated cost of US$4.70 per appointment scheduled. Conclusion: Re-engagement by a telehealth physician extender improves the rate at which patients with DR return for eye care, and can be done at a reasonable cost. This method of improving adherence with follow-up should be readily translatable to other health care settings.


Subject(s)
Diabetes Mellitus , Diabetic Retinopathy , Telemedicine , Humans , Diabetic Retinopathy/therapy , Diabetic Retinopathy/diagnosis , Telemedicine/methods , Patient Compliance , Appointments and Schedules
2.
Ophthalmology ; 124(3): e28, 2017 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28219512
3.
Ophthalmology ; 123(5): 1137-42, 2016 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26952593

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: To provide visual and anatomic outcomes for patients with retinal detachment (RD) in whom primary pneumatic retinopexy (PR) failed. DESIGN: Retrospective, single-center, consecutive case series. PARTICIPANTS: Eyes with RD that failed a primary PR. METHODS: Anatomic and functional outcomes were evaluated for patients receiving treatment for failed PR. Three secondary procedures were compared, including repeat PR, pars plana vitrectomy (PPV), and combined scleral buckle (SB) plus PPV (SB+PPV). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Anatomic reattachment and visual acuity (VA) at 1 year. RESULTS: Of a total of 423 primary PRs performed for RD, this study included 73 cases that failed. The overall single surgery anatomic success rate for the secondary procedure was 75%; the final success rate at 1 year was 100%. There was no statistically significant difference in success rates between repeat PR (63%), PPV (76%), and SB+PPV (88%). Improvement in VA was similar at 1 year between all 3 groups. Visual acuity at 1 year was similar between eyes undergoing PPV and SB+PPV (0.47 logMAR VA [Snellen equivalent, 20/59] for PPV and 0.52 logMAR VA [Snellen equivalent, 20/66] for SB+PPV; P = 0.75). Visual acuity at 1 year was better for those without macular involvement at the time of secondary procedure compared with eyes whose maculae detached (0.29 logMAR VA [Snellen equivalent, 20/39] vs. 0.73 logMAR VA [Snellen equivalent, 20/106]; P < 0.005). Fifty percent of PR failures underwent a secondary procedure within 1 week of primary PR; 80% occurred within 1 month. CONCLUSIONS: Anatomic success rates for secondary PR, PPV, and SB+PPV after failed PR were lower than published success rates for their use in primary RD. This suggests that a failed primary PR selects for RDs that are inherently more difficult to reattach. There was a trend suggesting that anatomic success rates are greater with SB+PPV than PPV and, in turn, with PPV than repeat PR. However, these differences were not statistically significant and did not translate into better VA gains at 1 year for either procedure. The suitable procedure after failed PR thus depends on patient presentation, surgeon preference, and patient preference.


Subject(s)
Cryosurgery , Retinal Detachment/surgery , Scleral Buckling , Treatment Failure , Vitrectomy , Adult , Aged , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Reoperation , Retina/physiopathology , Retinal Detachment/physiopathology , Retrospective Studies , Time Factors , Treatment Outcome , Visual Acuity/physiology
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...