Low vision aids provision in an urban setting in Germany between 2014 and 2017: a regional population based study with healthcare claims data.

PURPOSE: Little is known about the utilization of low vision services (LVS) in Germany. To understand which persons and how often these services would be utilized, this study aimed to investigate low vision aids (LVAs) provision in an urban setting and to describe user characteristics and trends in their characteristics. METHODS: A retrospective study based on a population-based healthcare claims database in Cologne (N = ~ 500,000), Germany. The study population comprised individuals, who were continuously insured at four large statutory health insurers and who redeemed a prescription for visual aids or aids for blindness between January 2014 and December 2017. We examined their socio-demographic and clinical characteristics. Trends in characteristics were examined with logistic and linear regression models over time. RESULTS: Out of ~ 500,000 persons, 781 unique individuals (~ 0.2%) redeemed an LVA prescription. They were mainly female (68.7%), 60 years or older (75.3%) and had macular degeneration (50.6%) and/or glaucoma (25.9%). In the working-age subgroup, 33.8% were employed. Visual aids were most often prescribed (74.1%) and of all types of LVAs, individuals most commonly redeemed a prescription for magnifiers (35.8%), screen readers (34.3%) and/or canes (17.1%). Of the entire study population, 75.4% received their prescription from an ophthalmologist, 5.3% from a general practitioner and 7.1% from other medical specialists. Significant trends in characteristics of individuals who redeemed an LVA prescription were not found. CONCLUSIONS: Between 2014 and 2017, 781 individuals in Cologne redeemed an LVA prescription. They had characteristics which mostly can be explained by the epidemiology of VI. Results indicate that individuals that redeemed LVAs have a magnification requirement of ≥ 1.5-fold and ≥ 6-fold. Furthermore, next to ophthalmologists, general practitioners and other medical specialists seem to play a role in LVA provision as well, which should be taken into account by policy makers when planning interventions for increasing LVS provision. Our findings provide a starting point to examine LVS provision in Germany.

A retrospective big data study using healthcare insurance claims to investigate the role of comorbidities in receiving low vision services.

Introduction: The aim was to examine the association between physical and mental comorbidity with receiving low vision services (LVS). Methods: A retrospective study based on Dutch claims data of health insurers was performed. We retrieved data (2015-2018) of patients (≥18 years) with eye diseases causing severe vision loss who received LVS at Dutch rehabilitation organizations in 2018 (target group) and patients who did not receive LVS, but who received ophthalmic medical specialist care for glaucoma, macular, diabetic retinal and/or retinal diseases in 2018 (reference group). For examining the association between the patients' comorbidities and receiving LVS, multivariable logistic regression was used. The relative quality of five different models was assessed with the Akaike Information Criterion (AIC). Results: The study population consisted of 574,262 patients, of which 8,766 in the target group and 565,496 in the reference group. Physical comorbidity was found in 83% and 14% had mental comorbidity. After adjustment for all assumed confounders, both physical and mental comorbidity remained significantly associated with receiving LVS. In the adjusted model, which also included both comorbidity variables, the best relative quality was found to describe the association between mental and physical comorbidity and receiving LVS. Conclusions: Mental comorbidity seemed to be independently associated with receiving LVS, implying that the odds for receiving a LVS referral are higher in patients who are vulnerable to mental comorbidity. Physical comorbidity was independently associated, however, the association with receiving LVS might not be that meaningful in terms of policy implications. Providing mental healthcare interventions for people with VI seems warranted.

Experiences of people with dual sensory loss in various areas of life: A qualitative study.

Individuals with dual sensory loss (DSL) appear to have limited ability to compensate for their visual impairment with residual hearing, or for their hearing impairment with residual vision, resulting in challenges in various areas of life. The aim of this qualitative study was to explore the diverse experiences facing individuals with DSL as well as to determine how they experience sensory compensation. Semi-structured interviews were carried out in twenty adults with DSL (13 females and 7 males, mean age 47 years). The causes of DSL severity varied amongst participants. Sensory compensation and experiences in regards to access to information, mobility, communication and fatigue were discussed. Interviews were audio recorded and transcribed verbatim. Framework analysis was used to summarize and interpret the data. In relation to access to information, our results show that, despite various challenges, the use of assistive technology such as voice command functions, enabled participants to operate effectively. Regarding mobility, most participants were capable of finding their way in familiar environments. However, if the setting was unfamiliar, assistance from others or reliance on navigation applications was necessary. Participants experienced little issues with having conversations in quiet settings, however, crowded settings were considered very difficult. The final results showed that most participants suffered from fatigue. Carefully considering which daily activities were feasible and having a daily routine helped to cope with fatigue. This study revealed the experiences of individuals with DSL in important areas of life. The results suggest that, even though many challenges are experienced, individuals with DSL are resourceful in finding compensation strategies. However, capturing participants' sensory compensation experiences was challenging.

Barriers and facilitators in the referral pathways to low vision services from the perspective of patients and professionals: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Underutilization of and lack of access to low vision services (LVS) has been reported internationally. The purpose of this study was to identify barriers and facilitators in LVS referral procedures and service delivery from both the perspective of people with visual impairment and professionals from different eye care providers in the Netherlands. METHODS: A qualitative study in the Netherlands was conducted. Barriers and facilitators were explored through semi structured interviews with older adults with macular degeneration, diabetic retinopathy and/or glaucoma (n = 14), and healthcare professionals including ophthalmologists and LVS professionals (n = 16). Framework analysis was used for analyzing the interviews with Atlas.ti software. RESULTS: According to both patients and professionals, facilitators in LVS access and utilization are having motivation, self-advocacy, high participation needs and social support, as well as being negatively impacted by the impairment. Both samples found having good communication skills and informing patients about LVS as a healthcare provider to facilitate access. A long patient-provider relationship and the Dutch healthcare system were also mentioned as facilitators. Professionals additionally found long disease duration and the presence of low vision optometric services in the ophthalmic practice to promote access. Barriers that were reported by patients and professionals are lack of motivation, self-advocacy and acceptance of the impairment in patients. In addition, having low participation needs as a patient, lack of information provision by providers and time constraints in the ophthalmic practice were mentioned as barriers. Professionals also reported lack of social support, short disease duration of patients, a short patient-provider relationship and lack of coordination of care in the ophthalmic practice to hinder access. CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest that providers' lack of information provision about LVS, especially to patients who are less assertive, hamper referral to LVS. Providers should have attention for patients' LVS needs and actively inform them and their social network about LVS to facilitate access. Educating and training providers about how and when to address LVS may help to reduce barriers in the referral pathways. In addition, referral procedures may benefit from tools that make providers more aware of LVS.