Barriers to Follow-Up Retinal Care During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Survey Study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: To characterize patient-identified barriers to care in those non-compliant with retina appointments during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Inclusion criteria included non-compliant patients from March 1, 2020 to May 1, 2020. Ultimately, 1,345 patients were invited to complete a 14-question survey. A retrospective chart review correlated clinical and demographic information. Univariate logistic regression, independent-samples t-test, and Pearson correlation coefficient identified differences among subgroups. RESULTS: Of the 1,345 patients, 181 (13.5%) completed the survey. The most significant barriers to care included fear of COVID (76/181; 42.0%), wait times (21/181; 11.6%), and costs (11/181; 6.1%). Patients who got their COVID information from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (7.8 ± 2.4) and televised news (8.0 ± 2.0) had higher levels of fear. Finally, patients with diabetic retinopathy and higher Charlson Comorbidity Index scores had greater concerns of COVID (P = .034 and P = .047, respectively). CONCLUSION: This survey study suggests fear of COVID-19 is a prominent new barrier to retinal care. Identifying those at risk for loss to follow-up can guide practices as the pandemic continues. [Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imaging Retina. 2021;52:526-533.].

Characterizing Progression to Neovascular AMD in Fellow Eyes of Patients Treated With Intravitreal Anti-VEGF Injections.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to assess the real-world incidence of conversion to bilateral neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) following treatment initiation of nAMD in the initial eye. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort of electronic health records from retinal centers across the United States (Vestrum Database) of all patients with unilateral nAMD treated with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy. RESULTS: A total of 22,553 patients with unilateral nAMD were included. Fellow eyes of 8,522 patients (38%) converted to nAMD. Among these, 2,639 (12%), 2,030 (9%), and 1,802 (8%) patients converted in Years 1, 2, and 3, respectively, after diagnosis in the first eye. Fellow eyes had better vision at conversion and 1 year following conversion. CONCLUSIONS: The fellow eye should be monitored at regular intervals to detect signs of neovascularization. Fellow eyes presented with significantly better vision at diagnosis than the initial eye and maintained better visual acuity with less injections. [Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imaging Retina. 2021;52:123-128.].

Sociodemographic Factors Influencing Rhegmatogenous Retinal Detachment Presentation and Outcome.

PURPOSE: The impact of sociodemographic factors on the presentation and outcomes of rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (RRD) in the United States has not been described. We analyzed the impact of these factors on the presenting fovea-on or off status of RRD, single operation anatomic success (SOAS) of repair, and postoperative visual acuity (VA). DESIGN: Retrospective, single-center, cohort study. PARTICIPANTS: Participants included 4061 patients from Wills Eye Hospital/Mid Atlantic Retina from February 2015 to February 2020. METHODS: Sociodemographic factors including age, gender, race, and regional mean household income (MHI) as determined by ZIP code were recorded. The VA at baseline and 12 months post-RRD repair was recorded. Multiple regression analysis was used to evaluate the relationship between sociodemographic factors to fovea-on or off presentation of RRD, SOAS, and 12-month VA. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Foveal attachment at presentation of RRD, SOAS, and 12-month VA. RESULTS: Older age (odds ratio [OR], 1.34 per decade, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.27-1.41, P < 0.001), male gender (OR, 1.27, 95% CI, 1.11-1.45, P < 0.001), non-White race (OR, 2.41, 95% CI, 1.92-3.03, P < 0.001), and lower MHI (OR, 0.94 per $10 000, 95% CI, 0.91-0.98, P = 0.005) were independent risk factors for fovea-off presentation of RD. The need for reoperation to repair RRD within 90 days was independently associated with fovea-off presentation (OR, 1.47, 95% CI, 1.24-1.74, P < 0.001) and non-White race (OR, 1.72, 95% CI, 1.27-2.39, P < 0.001). Finally, 12-month postoperative VA was worse in patients who were fovea-off (P < 0.001), older (P = 0.041), male (P = 0.038), and non-White (P = 0.007) but was not related to MHI (P = 0.24). CONCLUSIONS: These findings reveal associations between the sociodemographic factors and the presentation and outcomes of RRD. Physicians should be aware that socioeconomic disparities can negatively impact the prognosis of patients with RRD. Further study confirming these findings and efforts to mitigate their effects are warranted and will be of interest to the greater ophthalmology community.

Outcomes and Complications of In-Office Laser Demarcation of Peripheral Rhegmatogenous Retinal Detachments.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the outcomes of in-office laser demarcation (LD) for peripheral rhegmatogenous retinal detachments (RRDs). PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of peripheral RRDs treated with LD. Patient demographics, visual acuity (VA), and RRD characteristics were recorded. Complications requiring additional procedures were recorded. Multiple logistic regression was used to characterize the association of RRD anatomy to treatment complications. RESULTS: A total of 112 eyes of 107 patients were analyzed with mean follow-up of 20 ± 12 months. VA at baseline and last follow-up was equivalent (0.16 logMAR, Snellen equivalent 20/29). Ninety-five (84.8%) eyes were successfully treated without an additional procedure. In multivariate analysis, the presence of VH (odds ratio [OR] = 4.0; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1-17; P = .04) and RRDs in the inferior 6 clock hours (OR = 6.2; 95% CI, 1.5-29; P = .01) were associated with complications. CONCLUSIONS: LD is successful in treating peripheral RRDs. RRD characteristics less conducive to laser include presence of VH and inferior RRD. [Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imaging Retina. 2020;51:428-434.].

Trends in Retina Specialist Imaging Utilization from 2012 to 2016 in the United States Medicare Fee-for-Service Population.

PURPOSE: To characterize temporal trends and regional variance in retinal imaging utilization in the United States Medicare fee-for-service population from 2012-2016. DESIGN: Cross-sectional, retrospective database analysis. METHODS: This study addresses office or operating-room based retinal imaging. Our study population included retina specialists, defined as ophthalmologists performing either intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor injections or posterior segment laser photocoagulation and no neodymium-doped yttrium aluminum garnet laser capsulotomy. We recorded fundus photography, optical coherence tomography (OCT), intravenous fluorescein angiography (IVFA), indocyanine-green angiography, and ophthalmic ultrasound (B-scan) billed in the Medicare fee-for-service population from 2012-2016. Imaging obtained on any platform or device was eligible for inclusion (eg, posterior pole imaging vs ultrawidefield imaging). The main outcome measure was the relative utilization of retinal imaging modalities. RESULTS: National relative utilization of OCT increased from 61.5% in 2012 to 70.5% in 2016 (P < .001), while IVFA fell from 20.9% to 15.1% over the same interval (P < .001). Fundus photography decreased from 14.6% in 2012 to 11.7% in 2016 (P < .001). By 2016, the Midwest region had the highest relative utilization of OCT (75.2%) and lowest of IVFA (12.0%), while the West region had the lowest OCT (68.4%) and highest IVFA (17.0%). CONCLUSIONS: Among retina specialists, OCT usage increased while the utilization of fundus photography and IVFA has declined. The Midwest region had the highest utilization of OCT and lowest of IVFA.

Impact of digital imaging and communications in medicine workflow on the integration of patient demographics and ophthalmic test data.

PURPOSE: To determine the impact of a Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine (DICOM) workflow on the linkage of demographic information to ophthalmic testing data. DESIGN: Evaluation of technology. PARTICIPANTS: Six hundred ninety-nine visual field testing encounters performed by 6 ophthalmic technicians and the transfer error queue of 37 442 ophthalmic test results. METHODS: At 3 months before and 6 and 18 months after implementation of a DICOM workflow, technicians recorded the work required to enter, confirm, or edit patient demographics in each visual field device. We also determined the proportion of imaging tests sent to an error queue for manual reconciliation because of incorrect demographic information before and 3, 6, and 18 months after the DICOM workflow was established. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The proportion of testing encounters for which staff had to enter, edit, or merge patient demographics and the proportion of misfiled images. RESULTS: Staff entered, edited, or merged data for 48% of patients before implementation (n = 237). This decreased to 24% within 6 months and 20% within 18 months of implementing the DICOM archive (n = 230 and n = 232, respectively). Staff could locate a patient in a DICOM work list for 97% of encounters at 3 months and 99% at 18 months. Before implementation, 9.2% of the images required additional intervention to be associated with the correct patient (n = 3581). This decreased by 85% over 6 months to 1.4% (n = 9979; P < 0.01). There was an increase in the percentage of misfiled images between 6 and 18 months from 1.4% to 2.2% (n = 24 549; P < 0.01), representing an overall 76% decrease over 18 months relative to the pre-DICOM period. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of a DICOM-compatible workflow in an ophthalmology clinic reduced the need to enter or edit patient demographic information into imaging or testing devices by more than 50% and reduced the need to manage misfiled images by 76%. In a clinical environment that demands both efficiency and patient safety, the DICOM workflow is an important update to current practice.

The impact of an electronic health record transition on a glaucoma subspecialty practice.

PURPOSE: To assess the impact of an electronic health record (EHR) on patient experience, physician behavior, and clinic workflow in a glaucoma subspecialty clinic. DESIGN: Case-control (before/after) study. PARTICIPANTS: One hundred thirty-one adult patients seeking treatment at a glaucoma subspecialty practice for a nonprocedural office visit who consented to direct observation and 273 patients whose progress through the clinic stations was timed. METHODS: Three time points relative to the EHR transition were evaluated: a 2-week period before the transition, a 2-week period at 2 weeks after the transition, and a 2-week period at 6 months after the transition. At each of these time points, detailed timing of physician actions during the doctor-patient encounter were measured, a survey of patient attitudes regarding their visit and the method of documentation was conducted, and time spent by patients in each of the major aspects of the visit (screening/testing, physician, waiting) was recorded. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Time spent by physicians on the clinical examination, computer, paper records, or multitasking; patient experience of their clinic visit; and time spent by patients at various clinic stations. RESULTS: Two weeks after the transition, physicians spent more time with patients overall compared with baseline (8.4 vs. 11.6 minutes), reviewing paper records (0.2 vs. 0.6 minutes), and on computer-related tasks (2.3 vs. 4.2 minutes). At 6 months after EHR transition, physicians also spent more time compared with baseline on the clinical examination (5.1 vs. 6.4 minutes). There was a relative decrease in the percentage of patient time spent waiting to see the physician, although patients' perceptions of their visit and the EHR remained largely unchanged. Annual clinic volumes also were unaffected by the new EHR. CONCLUSIONS: There were changes in the physician-patient encounter that manifested within 2 weeks of EHR transition and then stabilized, suggesting that although an EHR transition is not without consequences, these can be measured early. Some of these findings, such as increased time dedicated to the clinical examination and the lack of change in patient perception after the switch, were unexpected. This study supports the contention that EHR implementation can be accomplished in an ophthalmology practice without compromising the efficiency of or patient satisfaction with the clinical encounter.