International Practice in Care Provision for Post-stroke Visual Impairment.

PURPOSE: This study sought to explore the practice of orthoptists internationally in care provision for poststroke visual impairment. METHODS: Survey questions were developed and piloted with clinicians, academics, and users. Questions addressed types of visual problems, how these were identified, treated, and followed up, care pathways in use, links with other professions, and referral options. The survey was approved by the institutional ethical committee. The survey was accessed via a web link that was circulated through the International Orthoptic Association member professional organisations to orthoptists. RESULTS: Completed electronic surveys were obtained from 299 individuals. About one-third (35.5%) of orthoptists saw patients within 2 weeks of stroke onset and over half (55.5%) by 1 month post stroke. Stroke survivors were routinely assessed by 87%; over three-quarters in eye clinics. Screening tools were used by 11%. Validated tests were used for assessment of visual acuity (76.5%), visual field (68.2%), eye movement (80.9%), binocular vision (77.9%), and visual function (55.8%). Visual problems suspected by family or professionals were high (86.6%). Typical overall follow-up period of vision care was less than 3 months. Designated care pathways for stroke survivors with visual problems were used by 56.9% of orthoptists. Information on visual impairment was provided by 85.9% of orthoptists. CONCLUSIONS: In international orthoptic practice, there is general agreement on assessment and management of visual impairment in stroke populations. More than half of orthoptists reported seeing stroke survivors within 1 month of the stroke onset, typically in eye clinics. There was a high use of validated tests of visual acuity, visual fields, ocular motility, and binocular vision. Similarly there was high use of established treatment options including prisms, occlusion, compensatory strategies, and oculomotor training, appropriately targeted at specific types of visual conditions/symptoms. This information can be used to inform choice of core outcome orthoptic measures in stroke practice.

Pediatric Ophthalmology Practice Efficiency: Utilization of Orthoptists as Partners in the Pediatric Eye Care Team.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The profession of orthoptics has been present for over 100 years and was created as a partnership with pediatric ophthalmology in an effort to provide better strabismus care to children. Orthoptists are known to improve practice efficiency, but to date, no quantitative data has been presented in the literature to support this claim. Proper utilization of an orthoptist is critical to improving practice efficiency and revenue. METHODS: Over a 6-month period, the financial impact to a pediatric ophthalmology practice by the addition of a second certified orthoptist (C.O.) was analyzed. Both indirect and direct income and expenses were considered. RESULTS: Despite their increased salary compared to an ophthalmic assistant, the utilization of an orthoptist provides considerable return on investment. The addition of a certified orthoptist increased practice revenue by over $70,000. CONCLUSION: The addition of a certified orthoptist in a physician's practice significantly increases practice revenue generated. When considering models of healthcare within ophthalmology, the use of an orthoptist as a physician extender has been shown to improve practice efficiency in a cost-effective manner.

Provision and cost of children's and young people's eye services in the UK: findings from a single primary care trust.

AIMS/BACKGROUND: Population-based information is useful for future strategic planning of healthcare resources. We wished to describe and cost the provision of eye services, beyond those of basic primary and emergency care, for the paediatric population of a single primary care trust. METHODS: Data from healthcare purchaser and provider records were collected for the year 2004/5 on provision and costing of hospital eye services, provision of spectacle vouchers, orthoptic screening, social services and visual-impairment team services to children in the Huntingdonshire Primary Care Trust population. RESULTS: In the year of study, in a population of 33,564 aged under 18 years, 1870 (5.6%) children underwent screening by an orthoptist. 1970 (5.9%) children required outpatient appointments, 445 (1.3%) were prescribed spectacles, and 87 (0.3%) children needed surgical procedures. A small proportion (69, 0.2%) of children were visually impaired. The total cost of providing comprehensive eye services to children within Hunts PCT was pound 366,727. CONCLUSION: Although the prevalence of significant visual impairment is low in childhood, overall, eye conditions are common in children and may have lifelong implications. The resources required to provide a comprehensive paediatric eye service, to screen for and manage common eye conditions, and support those with serious eye conditions or visual impairment, are significant. This study aids quantified prediction of future service usage, and facilitates decision-making on resource allocation and workforce organisation for children's eye care in the UK.

The assessment and management of strabismus and amblyopia: a national audit.

AIMS: To determine what systems are in place within ophthalmic services for the assessment and management of children suspected of having amblyopia and strabismus. To find out what methods are used for the assessment of these children. METHODS: A questionnaire-based study auditing 288 orthoptic departments in the UK. RESULTS: Responses were received from 75% orthoptic departments. Most hospitals employ more than one system for the assessment of strabismus and amblyopia, which is generally dependent on route of referral. These include 'orthoptic assessment without refraction' (66%), 'combined orthoptist and ophthalmologist assessment' (66%), while 22% have an entirely orthoptist/optometric system. Ophthalmologists are involved in the initial assessment in 145 units (67%), whereas some units involve an ophthalmologist only if response to treatment is poor (15%), or if surgery is required (6%). Fourteen per cent of units reviewed all children, with discharge criteria being based on normal visual acuity (52%), accurate visual acuity (39%) and a normal orthoptic assessment (42%). Seventy-six per cent of units review some children, commonly as a result of family history (55%), parental concern (43%), poor co-operation (30%) and young age (72%). In the absence of squint or amblyopia children are discharged at the first visit, in only 8% of units. There is considerable variation in the tests used to assess visual acuity. LogMAR-based tests (eg EDTRS) are not routinely used in 75% of units. CONCLUSION: Different systems exist for the assessment and management of squint and amblyopia across the country. While much of this variation is to be expected given their possible aetiologies, some could be reduced to produce a more cohesive service. There is also considerable scope for rationalising the tests used to screen infants and children for amblyopia and strabismus.

Paediatric community vision screening with combined optometric and orthoptic care: a 64-month review.

We report a new model of community-based secondary vision screening and demonstrate that a high proportion of children can be effectively managed in such a clinic without referral to the hospital eye service (HES). We performed a 64-month retrospective study of a secondary vision screening clinic providing the combined skills of an optometrist and orthoptist in a community setting. Particular attention was given to the diagnosis and management of children not referred to the HES. During this period, 1755 children were sent appointments and 74% (1300) attended the clinic. The community orthoptist and school nurses referred 53% of the patients and health visitors, general practitioners and community medical officers made 32% of the clinic referrals. Spectacles were prescribed for 41% of the children and 8% were prescribed patching. Sixteen per cent of the children were referred on to the HES. This model of care using the combined expertise of the orthoptist and optometrist is able to diagnose and manage the majority of children who have failed primary vision screening and avoids unnecessary referrals to the HES.