The content of optometric eye examinations for a presbyopic patient presenting with symptoms of flashing lights

Background:  Standardised patients (SPs) are the gold standard methodology for evaluating clinical care. This approach was used to investigate the content of optometric eyecare for a presbyopic patient who presented with recent photopsia. Methods:  A total of 102 community optometrists consented to be visited by an actor for a recorded eye examination. This actor received extensive training to enable accurate reporting of the content of the eye examinations, via an audio recording and a checklist completed for each clinical encounter. The actor presented unannounced (incognito) as a 59-year-old patient seeking a private eye examination and complaining of recent onset flashing lights. The results of each clinical encounter were recorded on a pre-designed checklist based on evidence-based reviews on photopsia, clinical guidelines and the views of an expert panel. Results:  The presence of the symptom of photopsia was proactively detected in 87% of cases. Although none of the optometrists visited asked all seven gold standard questions relating to the presenting symptoms of flashing lights, 35% asked four of the seven questions. A total of 85% of optometrists asked the patient if he noticed any floaters in his vision and 36% of optometrists asked if he had noticed any shadows in his vision. The proportion of the tests recommended by the expert panel that were carried out varied from 33 to 100% with a mean of 67%. Specifically, 66% recommended dilated fundoscopy to be carried out either by themselves or by another eyecare practitioner, and 29% of optometrists asked the patient to seek a second opinion regarding the photopsia. Of those who referred, 70% asked for the referral to be on the same day or within a week. Conclusion:  SP encounters are an effective way of measuring clinical care within optometry and should be considered for further comparative measurements of quality of care. As in research using SPs in other healthcare disciplines, our study has highlighted substantial differences between different practitioners in the duration and depth of their clinical investigations. This highlights the fact that not all eye examinations are the same but inherently different and that there is no such thing as a ‘standard sight test’. Future optometric continuing education could focus on history taking, examination techniques and referral guidelines for patients presenting with symptoms of posterior vitreous detachment, retinal breaks and secondary retinal detachment

The Prevalence of Visual Impairment in People with Dementia (the PrOVIDe study): a cross-sectional study of people aged 60–89 years with dementia and qualitative exploration of individual, carer and professional perspectives

Background: The prevalence of visual impairment (VI) and dementia increases with age and these conditions may coexist, but few UK data exist on VI among people with dementia. Objectives: To measure the prevalence of eye conditions causing VI in people with dementia and to identify/describe reasons for underdetection or inappropriate management. Design: Stage 1 – cross-sectional prevalence study. Stage 2 – qualitative research exploring participant, carer and professional perspectives of eye care. Setting: Stage 1 – 20 NHS sites in six English regions. Stage 2 – six English regions. Participants: Stage 1 – 708 participants with dementia (aged 60–89 years): 389 lived in the community (group 1) and 319 lived in care homes (group 2). Stage 2 – 119 participants. Interventions: Stage 1 gathered eye examination data following domiciliary sight tests complying with General Ophthalmic Services requirements and professional guidelines. Cognitive impairment was assessed using the Standardised Mini-Mental State Examination (sMMSE) test, and functional ability and behavior were assessed using the Bristol Activities of Daily Living Scale and Cambridge Behavioural Inventory – Revised. Stage 2 involved individual interviews (36 people with dementia and 11 care workers); and separate focus groups (34 optometrists; 38 family and professional carers). Main outcome measures.: VI defined by visual acuity (VA) worse than 6/12 or worse than 6/18 measured before and after refraction. Results: Stage 1 – when participants wore their current spectacles, VI prevalence was 32.5% [95% confidence interval (CI) 28.7% to 36.5%] and 16.3% (95% CI 13.5% to 19.6%) for commonly used criteria for VI of VA worse than 6/12 and 6/18, respectively. Of those with VI, 44% (VA 80% of participants. There was no evidence that the management of VI in people with dementia differed from that in older people in general. Exploratory analysis suggested significant deficits in some vision-related aspects of function and behaviour in participants with VI. Stage 2 key messages – carers and care workers underestimated how much can be achieved in an eye examination. People with dementia and carers were unaware of domiciliary sight test availability. Improved communication is needed between optometrists and carers; optometrists should be informed of the person’s dementia. Tailoring eye examinations to individual needs includes allowing extra time. Optometrists wanted training and guidance about dementia. Correcting VI may improve the quality of life of people with dementia but should be weighed against the risks and burdens of undergoing examinations and cataract surgery on an individual basis. Limitations: Sampling bias is possible owing to quota-sampling and response bias. Conclusions: The prevalence of VI is disproportionately higher in people with dementia living in care homes. Almost 50% of presenting VI is correctable with spectacles, and more with cataract surgery. Areas for future research are the development of an eye-care pathway for people with dementia; assessment of the benefits of early cataract surgery; and research into the feasibility of specialist optometrists for older people

Identifying visual stress during a routine eye examination

Purpose: To investigate whether the clinical tests used in routine eye examinations can identify adults whose reading rate increases with their preferred coloured overlay(s). Methods: Routine optometric tests were used to measure 73 undergraduate students’ refractive error, visual acuity, stereo-acuity, amplitude of accommodation, near point of convergence, associated heterophoria at near, colour vision and ocular motility. Participants chose an overlay or combination of overlays with colour optimal for clarity, and completed the Wilkins Rate of Reading Test with and without an overlay(s) of this colour. Results: Overall, there was a significant increase in reading speed with overlay (t(72) = −5.26, p 5% with their chosen coloured overlay(s). Ten participants (14%) had a reading speed increase of >10%. The increase in reading speed was not significantly associated with any clinical finding. Conclusion: Tests which are completed in routine eye examinations did not identify those participants who benefitted from coloured overlays in terms of reading speed

A needs assessment for a minor eye condition service within Leeds, Bradford and Airedale, UK

YesBackground: There are a number of limitations to the present primary eye care system in the UK. Patients with minor eye conditions typically either have to present to their local hospital or GP, or face a charge when visiting eye care professionals (optometrists). Some areas of the UK have commissioned enhanced community services to alleviate this problem; however, many areas have not. The present study is a needs assessment of three areas (Leeds, Airedale and Bradford) without a Minor Eye Conditions Service (MECS), with the aim of determining whether such a service is clinically or economically viable. Method: A pro forma was developed for optometrists and practice staff to complete when a patient presented whose reason for attending was due to symptoms indicative of a problem that could not be optically corrected. This form captured the reason for visit, whether the patient was seen, the consultation funding, the outcome and where the patient would have presented to if the optometrists could not have seen them. Optometrists were invited to participate via Local Optical Committees. Results were submitted via a Google form or a Microsoft Excel document and were analysed in Microsoft Excel. Results: Seventy-five percent of patients were managed in optometric practice. Nine and 16% of patients required subsequent referral to their General Practitioner or hospital ophthalmology department, respectively. Should they not have been seen, 34% of patients would have presented to accident and emergency departments and 59% to their general practitioner. 53% of patients paid privately for the optometrist appointment, 28% of patients received a free examination either through use of General Ophthalmic Service sight tests (9%) or optometrist good will (19%) and 19% of patients did not receive a consultation and were redirected to other providers (e.g. pharmacy, accident and emergency or General Practitioner). 88% of patients were satisfied with the level of service. Cost-analyses revealed a theoretical cost saving of £3198 to the NHS across our sample for the study period, indicating cost effectiveness. Conclusions: This assessment demonstrates that a minor eye condition service in the local areas would be economically and clinically viable and well received by patients

Comorbidity and dementia : a mixed method study on improving healthcare for people with dementia (CoDem)

© Queen’s Printer and Controller of HMSO 2016. This work was produced by Bunn et al. under the terms of a commissioning contract issued by the Secretary of State for Health. This issue may be freely reproduced for the purposes of private research and study and extracts (or indeed, the full report) may be included in professional journals provided that suitable acknowledgement is made and the reproduction is not associated with any form of advertising. Applications for commercial reproduction should be addressed to: NIHR Journals Library, National Institute for Health Research, Evaluation, Trials and Studies Coordinating Centre, Alpha House, University of Southampton Science Park, Southampton SO16 7NS, UKAmong people living with dementia (PLWD) there is a high prevalence of comorbid medical conditions but little is known about the effects of comorbidity on processes and quality of care and patient needs or how services are adapting to address the particular needs of this population. To explore the impact of dementia on access to non-dementia services and identify ways of improving the integration of services for this population