A Health-Related Quality of Life Measure for Patients Who Undergo Minimally Invasive Glaucoma Surgery.

PURPOSE: To develop a patient-reported outcome measure to assess the impact of glaucoma and treatment, including minimally invasive glaucoma surgery (MIGS). DESIGN: Observational study before and after concomitant cataract and Food and Drug Administration-approved implantable MIGS device surgery. SETTING: Survey administration was on a computer, iPad, or similar device. PATIENT POPULATION: 184 adults completed the baseline survey, 124 a survey 3 months after surgery, and 106 the 1-month test-retest reliability survey. The age range was 37 to 89 (average age = 72). Most were female (57%), non-Hispanic White (81%), and had a college degree (56%). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The Glaucoma Outcomes Survey (GOS) assesses functional limitations (27 items), vision-related symptoms (7 items), psychosocial issues (7 items), and satisfaction with microinvasive glaucoma surgery (1 item). These multiple-item scales were scored on a 0 to 100 range, with a higher score indicating worse health. RESULTS: Internal consistency reliability estimates ranged from 0.75 to 0.93, and 1-month test-retest intraclass correlations ranged from 0.83 to 0.92 for the GOS scales. Product-moment correlations among the scales ranged from 0.56 to 0.60. Improvement in visual acuity in the study eye from baseline to the 3-month follow-up was significantly related to improvements in GOS functional limitations (r = 0.18, P = .0485), vision-related symptoms (r = 0.19, P = .0386), and psychosocial concerns (r = 0.18, P = .0503). Responders to treatment ranged from 17% for vision-related symptoms to 48% for functional limitations. CONCLUSIONS: This study supports using the GOS for ophthalmic procedures such as MIGS. Further evaluation of the GOS in different patient subgroups and clinical settings is needed.

PROPHYLACTIC TREATMENT OF LATTICE DEGENERATION IN FELLOW EYES AFTER REPAIR OF UNCOMPLICATED PRIMARY RHEGMATOGENOUS RETINAL DETACHMENT.

PURPOSE: To evaluate prophylactic treatment (PTx) of lattice degeneration (LD) on retinal tear (RT) and rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (RRD) risk in fellow eyes of patients after primary RRD repair in the first eye. METHODS: This was a consecutive case series with cohort control involving patients with RRD repair from January 1, 2013, through December 31, 2017. Patients received PTx (PTx cohort) or no PTx (No-PTx cohort) in fellow eye with 5-year follow-up. Primary outcome measure was proportion with new fellow eye RT/RRD. Secondary outcomes included logarithm of minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and status of myopia, posterior vitreous detachment, and pseudophakia. RESULTS: Four hundred ninety-eight patients were divided into 146 and 352 in PTx and No-PTx cohorts, respectively. PTx cohort developed significantly ( P < 0.05) fewer RT/RRD (17%) than No-PTx cohort (41%). PTx significantly ( P < 0.05) lowered RT/RRD irrespective of posterior vitreous detachment and myopia status. PTx patients undergoing phacoemulsification demonstrated significantly ( P < 0.05) less RT/RRD (22%) than No-PTx cohort (31%). There was no significant ( P = 0.96) final BCVA difference between PTx (median = 0 logMAR) and No-PTx (median = 0 logMAR) cohorts. CONCLUSION: PTx of asymptomatic fellow eye LD reduced RT/RRD risk.

Shifts in ophthalmic care utilization during the COVID-19 pandemic in the US.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare restrictions during the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly in ophthalmology, led to a differential underutilization of care. An analytic approach is needed to characterize pandemic health services usage across many conditions. METHODS: A common analytical framework identified pandemic care utilization patterns across 261 ophthalmic diagnoses. Using a United States eye care registry, predictions of utilization expected without the pandemic were established for each diagnosis via models trained on pre-pandemic data. Pandemic effects on utilization were estimated by calculating deviations between observed and expected patient volumes from January 2020 to December 2021, with two sub-periods of focus: the hiatus (March-May 2020) and post-hiatus (June 2020-December 2021). Deviation patterns were analyzed using cluster analyses, data visualizations, and hypothesis testing. RESULTS: Records from 44.62 million patients and 2455 practices show lasting reductions in ophthalmic care utilization, including visits for leading causes of visual impairment (age-related macular degeneration, diabetic retinopathy, cataract, glaucoma). Mean deviations among all diagnoses are 67% below expectation during the hiatus peak, and 13% post-hiatus. Less severe conditions experience greater utilization reductions, with heterogeneities across diagnosis categories and pandemic phases. Intense post-hiatus reductions occur among non-vision-threatening conditions or asymptomatic precursors of vision-threatening diseases. Many conditions with above-average post-hiatus utilization pose a risk for irreversible morbidity, such as emergent pediatric, retinal, or uveitic diseases. CONCLUSIONS: We derive high-resolution insights on pandemic care utilization in the US from high-dimensional data using an analytical framework that can be applied to study healthcare disruptions in other settings and inform efforts to pinpoint unmet clinical needs.

The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted healthcare services globally, including eye care in the United States. Using a US eye disease database, we measured how the pandemic impacted patient visits for 261 eye diagnoses by comparing actual visit volumes for each diagnosis with what would have been expected without the pandemic. We identified groups of conditions with similar changes in visit levels and examined whether these shifts were related to characteristics of the diagnoses studied. We found extended decreases in patient presentations for most eye conditions, with greater reductions for less severe diagnoses, and with anomalies and differences in this trend across diagnosis categories and pandemic sub-periods. This highlights areas of potentially unmet need in vision care arising from the pandemic.

United States Population Disparities in Ophthalmic Care: Blindness and Visual Impairment in the IRIS® Registry (Intelligent Research in Sight).

PURPOSE: To evaluate associations of patient characteristics with United States eye care use and likelihood of blindness. DESIGN: Retrospective observational study. PARTICIPANTS: Patients (19 546 016) with 2018 visual acuity (VA) records in the American Academy of Ophthalmology's IRIS® Registry (Intelligent Research in Sight). METHODS: Legal blindness (20/200 or worse) and visual impairment (VI; worse than 20/40) were identified from corrected distance acuity in the better-seeing eye and stratified by patient characteristics. Multivariable logistic regressions evaluated associations with blindness and VI. Blindness was mapped by state and compared with population characteristics. Eye care use was analyzed by comparing population demographics with United States Census estimates and proportional demographic representation among blind patients versus a nationally representative US population sample (National Health and Nutritional Examination Survey [NHANES]). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Prevalence and odds ratios for VI and blindness; proportional representation in the IRIS® Registry, Census, and NHANES by patient demographics. RESULTS: Visual impairment was present in 6.98% (n = 1 364 935) and blindness in 0.98% (n = 190 817) of IRIS patients. Adjusted odds of blindness were highest among patients ≥ 85 years old (odds ratio [OR], 11.85; 95% confidence interval [CI], 10.33-13.59 vs. those 0-17 years old). Blindness also was associated positively with rural location and Medicaid, Medicare, or no insurance vs. commercial insurance. Hispanic (OR, 1.59; 95% CI, 1.46-1.74) and Black (OR, 1.73; 95% CI, 1.63-1.84) patients showed a higher odds of blindness versus White non-Hispanic patients. Proportional representation in IRIS Registry relative to the Census was higher for White than Hispanic (2- to 4-fold) or Black (11%-85%) patients (P < 0.001). Blindness overall was less prevalent in NHANES than IRIS Registry; however, prevalence in adults aged 60+ was lowest among Black participants in the NHANES (0.54%) and second highest among comparable Black adults in IRIS (1.57%). CONCLUSIONS: Legal blindness from low VA was present in 0.98% of IRIS patients and associated with rural location, public or no insurance, and older age. Compared with US Census estimates, minorities may be underrepresented among ophthalmology patients, and compared with NHANES population estimates, Black individuals may be overrepresented among blind IRIS Registry patients. These findings provide a snapshot of US ophthalmic care and highlight the need for initiatives to address disparities in use and blindness. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S): Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.

CLINICAL OUTCOMES OF ACUTE ENDOPHTHALMITIS AFTER INTRAVITREAL DELIVERY OF VASCULAR ENDOTHELIAL GROWTH FACTOR INHIBITORS VERSUS STEROIDS.

PURPOSE: To compare patients with acute endophthalmitis after intravitreal injection of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) inhibitors vs. steroids. METHODS: Retrospective single-center, nonrandomized interventional study from 2013 to 2021.Patients underwent vitreous biopsy before initiating treatment and were divided into the following cohorts: (1) anti-VEGF managed medically (T&I-anti-VEGF), (2) anti-VEGF managed by immediate pars plana vitrectomy (PPV-anti-VEGF), and (3) steroid therapy and managed medically or by pars plana vitrectomy (steroid). RESULTS: A total of 141 patients were analyzed. The steroid cohort demonstrated significantly worse presenting (median = 2.80 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution [logMAR]; P ≤ 0.01) and final (median = 2.30 logMAR) best-corrected visual acuity compared with T&I-anti-VEGF (presenting: median = 2.00 logMAR; final: median = 0.40 logMAR) and pars plana vitrectomy-anti-VEGF cohorts (presenting: median = 2.30 logMAR; final: median = 0.48 logMAR). There was no significant ( P = 0.33) difference in the final best-corrected visual acuity between T&I-anti-VEGF and pars plana vitrectomy-anti-VEGF cohorts. There were no significant ( P ≥ 0.63) differences among cohorts in best-corrected visual acuity before acute endophthalmitis diagnosis (T&I-anti-VEGF: median = 0.40 logMAR; pars plana vitrectomy-anti-VEGF: median = 0.40 logMAR; steroid: median = 0.44 logMAR). Microbial cultures revealed similar profiles for all cohorts. CONCLUSION: Acute endophthalmitis after intravitreal injection steroid therapy had worse outcomes compared with anti-VEGF therapy.

EXTERNAL DRAINAGE OF SUBRETINAL FLUID DURING RHEGMATOGENOUS RETINAL DETACHMENT REPAIR.

PURPOSE: To describe the safety and efficacy of rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (RRD) repair with external drainage of subretinal fluid using a 28-gauge External Drainage and Depression device (Vortex Surgical, Chesterfield, MO). METHODS: Retrospective review of patients who underwent primary rhegmatogenous retinal detachment repair with scleral buckle, pars plana vitrectomy, or scleral buckle/pars plana vitrectomy using the drainage device from August 2018 through March 2020, performed by four surgeons at two vitreoretinal practices. RESULTS: Eighty-three eyes of 83 patients were included. At presentation, 28% had proliferative vitreoretinopathy. Surgery included 65% scleral buckle/pars plana vitrectomy, 33% pars plana vitrectomy, and 2% scleral buckle. There were no cases of retinal incarceration and two subretinal hemorrhages at the drainage site (both < 2 DD), 2 cases of recurrent RD with proliferative vitreoretinopathy (1 had proliferative vitreoretinopathy at presentation), and 6 (10%) new epiretinal membranes (3 were mild). There were no other complications. Mean follow-up was 274 days. Single operation success rate for those with ≥ 6-month follow-up was 97% (57/59). CONCLUSION: External drainage of subretinal fluid during rhegmatogenous retinal detachment repair demonstrated a favorable safety profile with a high single operation success rate. Further study of the role of external drainage in rhegmatogenous retinal detachment repair is warranted.

Reoperation Rates of Patients Undergoing Primary Noncomplex Retinal Detachment Surgery in a Cohort of the IRIS Registry.

PURPOSE: To present the reoperation rates of patients who underwent a primary noncomplex RD repair in a cohort of the American Academy of Ophthalmology IRIS Registry. DESIGN: Retrospective, nonrandomized comparative clinical study. METHODS: This was a retrospective, nonrandomized cohort study of patients who underwent a primary noncomplex RD repair with either a scleral buckle (SB) or vitrectomy with or without scleral buckle (PPV±SB) between 2013 and 2016. The primary outcome was the odds of reoperation within 12 months. RESULTS: Of 24,068 patients, 2,937 patients (12.2%) underwent an SB and 21,131 patients (87.8%) a PPV ± SB. The overall reoperation rate was 12.2% for SB and 11.6% for PPV ± SB. After multivariate adjustment for age and initial RD diagnosis, the PPV ± SB group exhibited a lower odds of reoperation within 12 months compared with SB only (OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.75-0.96, P = .007). However, there was an age interaction. Patients ≤50 years old with PPV ± SB exhibited a higher odds of reoperation (OR 1.46, 95% CI 1.14-1.88, P = .003) compared to SB only. Patients >50 years with PPV ± SB had a lower odds of reoperation (OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.63-0.84, P < .0001). CONCLUSION: The odds of reoperation of PPV ± SB compared with SB only varies depending on the patient's age. Further subset analyses are required to determine if there are clinically relevant differences with respect to RD configuration or other RD repair types (PPV only vs PPV with SB).