The Eye-Opening Truth About Private Surgical Facilities in Canada.

This paper examines the contentious issue of using contracted surgical facilities (CSFs) for scheduled eye surgeries within Canada's publicly funded healthcare system. Despite the debate over the use of CSFs, there is a stark lack of Canadian-focused empirical evidence to guide policy decisions. This paper uses the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development's healthcare system performance conceptual model - access, quality and cost/expenditures - as a framework to explore the debates surrounding CSFs. It highlights the mixed evidence from international studies and proposes recommendations for policy makers to ensure equitable access, maintain high-quality care and achieve cost-effectiveness. The paper underscores the necessity for informed policy making supported by robust empirical research, stakeholder engagement and continuous policy evaluation to address the challenges posed by the integration of CSFs into Canada's healthcare landscape.

Defunding preoperative histories and physical exams: putting the cart before the evidence?

OBJECTIVE: Several Canadian health authorities have defunded preoperative cataract history and physical examinations performed by general practitioners. While these authorities suggest that such decisions are evidence-based, we are unaware of reviews addressing this topic, nor have health authorities been forthcoming with evidence used in their decision-making processes. The objective of this study is to perform a comprehensive review of the literature regarding the value of preoperative histories and physical examinations in cataract surgery. DESIGN: Systematic review. METHODS: The following databases were searched: PubMed, MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, Web of Science, EMBASE, CINAHL, and BIOSIS Previews. Only higher-level forms of evidence were assessed, including randomized controlled trials, cohort, and case-control studies. Two reviewers independently assessed titles and abstracts for concordance with inclusion criteria. Disagreements between authors were resolved by discussion. RESULTS: We identified 3 articles that met our inclusion criteria: two prospective and one retrospective cohort studies. These articles suggest traditional preoperative histories and physical examinations could be replaced by a health questionnaire (Jastrzebski et al. and Reeves et al.) or eliminated altogether (Alboim et al.). DISCUSSION: Scientific literature presently contains 3 studies suggesting that preoperative histories and physical examinations could be modified or eliminated. However, methodological weaknesses and data analysis derived from these studies suggests defunding preoperative medical examination may be premature. CONCLUSIONS: While finding efficiencies in medical care is admirable, physicians should be cautious in accepting recommendations that reduce checks ensuring perioperative safety. Further studies of better methodological quality should be completed to clarify the present evidence.

Disinfection of the Goldman applanation tonometer: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: The Goldmann applanation tonometer is the gold standard for measuring intraocular pressure and a possible vector for the transmission of infectious diseases. The purpose of this study is to consolidate the evidence pertaining to the disinfection of Goldmann tonometers in an effort to facilitate an informed discussion regarding public policy in this important area. DESIGN: Systematic review. METHODS: An exhaustive literature review was undertaken to identify primary-level research that assesses the effectiveness of different agents used in the disinfection of Goldmann applanation tonometer prisms. Seven discrete databases were reviewed by 2 independent researchers, and a symmetrical screening process was used to identify and review all pertinent studies. RESULTS: Our review identified only 19 primary-level studies that relate specifically to the disinfection of Goldmann tonometer prisms. These studies are largely heterogeneous with regard to the pathogens and disinfectants that were tested and the experimental protocols that were employed. Accordingly, definitive conclusions as to the optimal agent cannot be made on this basis. Furthermore, the results of our review reinforce previous suggestions that only adenovirus has been transmitted between patients via the Goldmann tonometer. CONCLUSIONS: The present state of the literature does not permit a definitive conclusion regarding optimal disinfection agent for Goldmann applanation tonometer prisms. Further well-constructed studies are required to better delineate the effectiveness of disinfectants in the specific context of tonometer prisms.