Informed consent in refractive surgery: in-person vs telemedicine approach.

Purpose:The aim of this study was to compare the quality of consent process in refractive surgery between patients who had a preoperative consent discussion with the surgeon using a telemedicine approach and those who had a face-to-face discussion. Methods:Patients treated between January and December 2017 (8,184 laser vision correction [LVC] and 3,754 refractive lens exchange [RLE] patients) that attended day 1 and 1-month postoperative visit were retrospectively reviewed. Preoperative consent preparation included a consultation with an optometrist, observation of an educational video, and written information. Patients then selected either a face-to-face appointment with their surgeon (in-clinic group) or a telemedicine appointment (remote group) for their consent discussion, according to their preference. Patient experience questionnaire and clinical data were included in a multivariate model to explore factors associated with consent quality. Results:Prior to surgery, 80.1% of LVC and 47.9% of RLE patients selected remote consent. Of all LVC patients, 97.5% of in-clinic and 98.3% of remote patients responded that they were adequately consented for surgery (P=0.04). Similar percentages in the RLE group were 97.6% for in-clinic and 97.9% for remote patients (P=0.47). In a multivariate model, the major predictor of patient's satisfaction with the consent process was postoperative satisfaction with visual acuity, responsible for 80.4% of variance explained by the model. Other significant contributors were postoperative visual phenomena and dry eyes, difficulty with night driving, close-up and distance vision, postoperative uncorrected distance visual acuity, change in corrected distance visual acuity, and satisfaction with the surgeon's approach. The type of consent (remote or in-clinic) had no impact on patient's perception of consent quality in the regression model. Conclusion:The majority of patients opted for telemedicine-assisted consent. Those who chose it were equally satisfied as those who had a face-to-face meeting with their surgeon. Dissatisfaction with surgical outcome was the major factor affecting patient's perception of consent quality, regardless of the method of their consent

Information Systems and Health Care-VI: Medical Nomograms with Decision Support Systems: A Case Study and an Enhanced Architecture

Nomograms are used extensively in medical practice as decision aids to adjust treatment protocols based on knowledge gained from previous outcomes. In this paper, we describe a case study of a surgical nomogram system that was developed for estimating laser settings in refractive eye surgery. This system was developed in Microsoft Access with add-ins from Total Access Statistics. It is being used in one of the authors\u27 surgical practice. Based on experiences with the system, we present an enhanced architecture for a nomogram server that can be used in other areas of medicine

IMI – industry guidelines and ethical considerations for myopia control report

PURPOSE. To discuss guidelines and ethical considerations associated with the development and prescription of treatments intended for myopia control (MC). METHODS. Critical review of published papers and guidance documents was undertaken, with a view to carefully considering the ethical standards associated with the investigation, development, registration, marketing, prescription, and use of MC treatments. RESULTS. The roles and responsibilities of regulatory bodies, manufacturers, academics, eye care practitioners, and patients in the use of MC treatments are explored. Particular attention is given to the ethical considerations for deciding whether to implement a MC strategy and how to implement this within a clinical trial or practice setting. Finally, the responsibilities in marketing, support, and education required to transfer required knowledge and skills to eye care practitioners and academics are discussed. CONCLUSIONS. Undertaking MC treatment in minors creates an ethical challenge for a wide variety of stakeholders. Regulatory bodies, manufacturers, academics, and clinicians all share an ethical responsibility to ensure that the products used for MC are safe and efficacious and that patients understand the benefits and potential risks of such products. This International Myopia Institute report highlights these ethical challenges and provides stakeholders with recommendations and guidelines in the development, financial support, prescribing, and advertising of such treatments.</p

BUSM Dean's report

Reports from the Office of the Dean, Boston University School of Medicine

Innovative Diagnostic Tools for Ophthalmology in Low-Income Countries

Globally, there are almost 300 million people blind and visually impaired and over 90% live developing countries. The gross disparity in access to ophthalmologists limits the ability to accurately diagnose potentially blinding conditions like cataract, glaucoma, trachoma, uncorrected refractive error and limits timely initiation of medical and surgical treatment. Since 85% of blindness is preventable, bridging this chasm for care is even more critical in preventing needless blindness. Many low-income countries must rely on community health workers, physician assistants, and cataract surgeons for primary eye care. Ophthalmology in low-income countries (LIC) is further challenging due to complexities brought from tropical climates, frail electric grids, poor road and water infrastructure, limited diagnostic capability and limited treatment options. Vision 2020 set the goal of eliminating preventable blindness by 2020 despite formidable obstacles. Innovative technologies are emerging to test visual acuity, correct refractive error quickly and inexpensively, capture retinal images with portable tools, train cataract surgeons using simulators, capitalize on mHealth, access ophthalmic information remotely. These advancements are allowing nonspecialized ophthalmic practitioners to provide low-cost, high impact eye care in resource-limited regions around the world

Presbyopia Correction During Cataract Surgery with Multifocal Intraocular Lenses

Introduction: The first generations of multifocal intraocular lenses (MFIOLs) were designed to provide patients good distance and near vision, but intermediate was not satisfactory. Trifocal, a bifocal of low-add and quadrifocal MFIOLs were invented, offering possibility to correct vision for distance, near, and intermediate tasks. The novel IOL, extended range of vision (EROV), is covering mostly intermediate and distance vision, with lower level of photic phenomena

Cost and quality of life of overlooked eye care needs of children

Background: The objective of this research was to conduct a systematic review and cost analysis to summarize, from the Ministry of Health perspective, the costs families might incur because of their child’s prescription for refractive errors and amblyopia correction. Methods: Databases including MEDLINE, Embase, BIOSIS, CINAHL, HEED, ISI Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library as well as the gray literature were searched. Systematic review was conducted using EPPI-Reviewer 4. Percentage difference in cost of glasses and patches per patient per various diagnoses were computed. The cost of glasses and patches was projected over a 5-year time horizon. Cost-utility analysis was performed. Results: In total, 302 records were retrieved from multiple databases and an additional 48 records were identified through gray literature search. From these, a total of 14 studies (10,388 subjects) were eligible for quantitative analysis. The cost of glasses increased significantly for congenital cataract patients to US$1,820, esotropia patients to US$840, myopes to US$411, amblyopes (mixed) to US$916, anisometropes to US$521, and patients with strabismus to US$728 over a 5-year period making them unaffordable for low-income families. Incremental cost of glasses of congenital cataract patients with delayed treatment was computed to be US$1,690 per health utility gained. Incremental cost of glasses for high refractive error was US$93 per health utility gained in non-compliant children. For amblyopia patients, incremental cost of glasses per quality-adjusted life years gained was US$3,638. Conclusion: Cost of corrective lenses is associated with significant financial burden and thus other means of mitigating costs should be considered. Eyesight problems in children are perceived as low-priority health needs. Thus, educational interventions on substantial visual deficits of not wearing glasses should be offered to families and governmental health agencies

The effectiveness of early lens extraction with intraocular lens implantation for the treatment of primary angle-closure glaucoma (EAGLE) : study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Peer reviewedPublisher PD