Employee Empowerment

The work done by the human resource in healthcare are the key to bringing about patient healing. As the tasks that each of the different human resource healthcare professionals have to do is quite enormous and varied and differs from patient to patient depending upon their unique needs it is also equally challenging to train the staff. The concept of employee empowerment is therefore extremely critical for staff to do what requires to be done for patients in a timely manner keeping the best interest of the patient in the mind. This article takes a thorough look at this concept as well as how it is measured. Its application is also discussed taking the example of the Aravind Eye Hospital

Investigation of the Accuracy of a Low-Cost, Portable Autorefractor to Provide Well-Tolerated Eyeglass Prescriptions: A Randomized Crossover Trial

Purpose: To compare patient preferences for eyeglasses prescribed using a low-cost, portable wavefront autorefractor versus standard subjective refraction (SR). Design: Randomized, cross-over clinical trial. Participants: Patients aged 18 to 40 years presenting with refractive errors (REs) to a tertiary eye hospital in Southern India. Methods: Participants underwent SR followed by autorefraction (AR) using the monocular version of the QuickSee device (PlenOptika Inc). An independent optician, masked to the refraction approach, prepared eyeglasses based on each refraction approach. Participants (masked to refraction source) were randomly assigned to use SR- or AR-based eyeglasses first, followed by the other pair, for 1 week each. At the end of each week, participants had their vision checked and were interviewed about their experience with the eyeglasses. Main Outcome Measures: Patients preferring eyeglasses were chosen using AR and SR. Results: The 400 participants enrolled between March 26, 2018, and August 2, 2019, had a mean (standard deviation) age of 28.4 (6.6) years, and 68.8% were women. There was a strong correlation between spherical equivalents using SR and AR (r = 0.97, P < 0.001) with a mean difference of −0.07 diopters (D) (95% limits of agreement [LoA], −0.68 to 0.83). Of the 301 patients (75.2%) who completed both follow-up visits, 50.5% (n = 152) and 49.5% (n = 149) preferred glasses prescribed using SR and AR, respectively (95% CI, 45.7–56.3; P = 0.86). There were no differences in demographic or vision characteristics between participants with different preferences (P > 0.05 for all). Conclusions: We observed a strong agreement between the prescriptions from SR and AR, and eyeglasses prescribed using SR and AR were equally preferred by patients. Wider use of prescribing based on AR alone in resource-limited settings is supported by these finding

Use of Cooking Fuels and Cataract in a Population-Based Study: The India Eye Disease Study.

BACKGROUND: Biomass cooking fuels are commonly used in Indian households, especially by the poorest socioeconomic groups. Cataract is highly prevalent in India and the major cause of vision loss. The evidence on biomass fuels and cataract is limited. OBJECTIVES: To examine the association of biomass cooking fuels with cataract and type of cataract. METHODS: We conducted a population-based study in north and south India using randomly sampled clusters to identify people ≥ 60 years old. Participants were interviewed and asked about cooking fuel use, socioeconomic and lifestyle factors and attended hospital for digital lens imaging (graded using the Lens Opacity Classification System III), anthropometry, and blood collection. Years of use of biomass fuels were estimated and transformed to a standardized normal distribution. RESULTS: Of the 7,518 people sampled, 94% were interviewed and 83% of these attended the hospital. Sex modified the association between years of biomass fuel use and cataract; the adjusted odds ratio (OR) for a 1-SD increase in years of biomass fuel use and nuclear cataract was 1.04 (95% CI: 0.88, 1.23) for men and 1.28 (95% CI: 1.10, 1.48) for women, p interaction = 0.07. Kerosene use was low (10%). Among women, kerosene use was associated with nuclear (OR = 1.76, 95% CI: 1.04, 2.97) and posterior subcapsular cataract (OR = 1.71, 95% CI: 1.10, 2.64). There was no association among men. CONCLUSIONS: Our results provide robust evidence for the association of biomass fuels with cataract for women but not for men. Our finding for kerosene and cataract among women is novel and requires confirmation in other studies. Citation: Ravilla TD, Gupta S, Ravindran RD, Vashist P, Krishnan T, Maraini G, Chakravarthy U, Fletcher AE. 2016. Use of cooking fuels and cataract in a population-based study: the India Eye Disease Study. Environ Health Perspect 124:1857-1862; http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/EHP193

Rapid Assessment of Avoidable Blindness in India

BACKGROUND: Rapid assessment of avoidable blindness provides valid estimates in a short period of time to assess the magnitude and causes of avoidable blindness. The study determined magnitude and causes of avoidable blindness in India in 2007 among the 50+ population. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Sixteen randomly selected districts where blindness surveys were undertaken 7 to 10 years earlier were identified for a follow up survey. Stratified cluster sampling was used and 25 clusters (20 rural and 5 urban) were randomly picked in each district.. After a random start, 100 individuals aged 50+ were enumerated and examined sequentially in each cluster. All those with presenting vision = 50 years were enumerated, and 94.7% examined. Based on presenting vision,, 4.4% (95% Confidence Interval[CI]: 4.1,4.8) were severely visually impaired (vision<6/60 to 3/60 in the better eye) and 3.6% (95% CI: 3.3,3.9) were blind (vision<3/60 in the better eye). Prevalence of low vision (<6/18 to 6/60 in the better eye) was 16.8% (95% CI: 16.0,17.5). Prevalence of blindness and severe visual impairment (<6/60 in the better eye) was higher among rural residents (8.2%; 95% CI: 7.9,8.6) compared to urban (7.1%; 95% CI: 5.0, 9.2), among females (9.2%; 95% CI: 8.6,9.8) compared to males (6.5%; 95% CI: 6.0,7.1) and people above 70 years (20.6%; 95% CI: 19.1,22.0) compared to people aged 50-54 years (1.3%; 95% CI: 1.1,1.6). Of all blindness, 88.2% was avoidable. of which 81.9% was due to cataract and 7.1% to uncorrected refractive errors/uncorrected aphakia. CONCLUSIONS: Cataract and refractive errors are major causes of blindness and low vision and control strategies should prioritize them. Most blindness and low vision burden is avoidable

Keeping an eye on eye care: monitoring progress towards effective coverage

The eye care sector is well positioned to contribute to the advancement of universal health coverage within countries. Given the large unmet need for care associated with cataract and refractive error, coupled with the fact that highly cost-effective interventions exist, we propose that effective cataract surgery coverage (eCSC) and effective refractive error coverage (eREC) serve as ideal indicators to track progress in the uptake and quality of eye care services at the global level, and to monitor progress towards universal health coverage in general. Global targets for 2030 for these two indicators were endorsed by WHO Member States at the 74th World Health Assembly in May, 2021. To develop consensus on the data requirements and methods of calculating eCSC and eREC, WHO convened a series of expert consultations to make recommendations for standardising the definitions and measurement approaches for eCSC and eREC and to identify areas in which future work is required

Effective cataract surgical coverage in adults aged 50 years and older: estimates from population-based surveys in 55 countries.

BACKGROUND: Cataract is the leading cause of blindness globally. Effective cataract surgical coverage (eCSC) measures the number of people in a population who have been operated on for cataract, and had a good outcome, as a proportion of all people operated on or requiring surgery. Therefore, eCSC describes service access (ie, cataract surgical coverage, [CSC]) adjusted for quality. The 74th World Health Assembly endorsed a global target for eCSC of a 30-percentage point increase by 2030. To enable monitoring of progress towards this target, we analysed Rapid Assessment of Avoidable Blindness (RAAB) survey data to establish baseline estimates of eCSC and CSC. METHODS: In this secondary analysis, we used data from 148 RAAB surveys undertaken in 55 countries (2003-21) to calculate eCSC, CSC, and the relative quality gap (% difference between eCSC and CSC). Eligible studies were any version of the RAAB survey conducted since 2000 with individual participant survey data and census population data for people aged 50 years or older in the sampling area and permission from the study's principal investigator for use of data. We compared median eCSC between WHO regions and World Bank income strata and calculated the pooled risk difference and risk ratio comparing eCSC in men and women. FINDINGS: Country eCSC estimates ranged from 3·8% (95% CI 2·1-5·5) in Guinea Bissau, 2010, to 70·3% (95% CI 65·8-74·9) in Hungary, 2015, and the relative quality gap from 10·8% (CSC: 65·7%, eCSC: 58·6%) in Argentina, 2013, to 73·4% (CSC: 14·3%, eCSC: 3·8%) in Guinea Bissau, 2010. Median eCSC was highest among high-income countries (60·5% [IQR 55·6-65·4]; n=2 surveys; 2011-15) and lowest among low-income countries (14·8%; [IQR 8·3-20·7]; n=14 surveys; 2005-21). eCSC was higher in men than women (148 studies pooled risk difference 3·2% [95% CI 2·3-4·1] and pooled risk ratio of 1·20 [95% CI 1·15-1·25]). INTERPRETATION: eCSC varies widely between countries, increases with greater income level, and is higher in men. In pursuit of 2030 targets, many countries, particularly in lower-resource settings, should emphasise quality improvement before increasing access to surgery. Equity must be embedded in efforts to improve access to surgery, with a focus on underserved groups. FUNDING: Indigo Trust, Peek Vision, and Wellcome Trust

Vulnerable newborn types: analysis of subnational, population-based birth cohorts for 541 285 live births in 23 countries, 2000–2021

Objective: To examine prevalence of novel newborn types among 541 285 live births in 23 countries from 2000 to 2021. Design: Descriptive multi-country secondary data analysis. Setting: Subnational, population-based birth cohort studies (n = 45) in 23 low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) spanning 2000–2021. Population: Liveborn infants. Methods: Subnational, population-based studies with high-quality birth outcome data from LMICs were invited to join the Vulnerable Newborn Measurement Collaboration. We defined distinct newborn types using gestational age (preterm [PT], term [T]), birthweight for gestational age using INTERGROWTH-21st standards (small for gestational age [SGA], appropriate for gestational age [AGA] or large for gestational age [LGA]), and birthweight (low birthweight, LBW [<2500 g], nonLBW) as ten types (using all three outcomes), six types (by excluding the birthweight categorisation), and four types (by collapsing the AGA and LGA categories). We defined small types as those with at least one classification of LBW, PT or SGA. We presented study characteristics, participant characteristics, data missingness, and prevalence of newborn types by region and study. Results: Among 541 285 live births, 476 939 (88.1%) had non-missing and plausible values for gestational age, birthweight and sex required to construct the newborn types. The median prevalences of ten types across studies were T+AGA+nonLBW (58.0%), T+LGA+nonLBW (3.3%), T+AGA+LBW (0.5%), T+SGA+nonLBW (14.2%), T+SGA+LBW (7.1%), PT+LGA+nonLBW (1.6%), PT+LGA+LBW (0.2%), PT+AGA+nonLBW (3.7%), PT+AGA+LBW (3.6%) and PT+SGA+LBW (1.0%). The median prevalence of small types (six types, 37.6%) varied across studies and within regions and was higher in Southern Asia (52.4%) than in Sub-Saharan Africa (34.9%). Conclusions: Further investigation is needed to describe the mortality risks associated with newborn types and understand the implications of this framework for local targeting of interventions to prevent adverse pregnancy outcomes in LMICs.The Children's Investment Fund Foundation, grant 2004-04670. The funders had no role in the study design, data collection, analysis or interpretation of the paper

Vulnerable newborn types: analysis of subnational, population-based birth cohorts for 541 285 live births in 23 countries, 2000-2021.

OBJECTIVE: To examine prevalence of novel newborn types among 541 285 live births in 23 countries from 2000 to 2021. DESIGN: Descriptive multi-country secondary data analysis. SETTING: Subnational, population-based birth cohort studies (n = 45) in 23 low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) spanning 2000-2021. POPULATION: Liveborn infants. METHODS: Subnational, population-based studies with high-quality birth outcome data from LMICs were invited to join the Vulnerable Newborn Measurement Collaboration. We defined distinct newborn types using gestational age (preterm [PT], term [T]), birthweight for gestational age using INTERGROWTH-21st standards (small for gestational age [SGA], appropriate for gestational age [AGA] or large for gestational age [LGA]), and birthweight (low birthweight, LBW [<2500 g], nonLBW) as ten types (using all three outcomes), six types (by excluding the birthweight categorisation), and four types (by collapsing the AGA and LGA categories). We defined small types as those with at least one classification of LBW, PT or SGA. We presented study characteristics, participant characteristics, data missingness, and prevalence of newborn types by region and study. RESULTS: Among 541 285 live births, 476 939 (88.1%) had non-missing and plausible values for gestational age, birthweight and sex required to construct the newborn types. The median prevalences of ten types across studies were T+AGA+nonLBW (58.0%), T+LGA+nonLBW (3.3%), T+AGA+LBW (0.5%), T+SGA+nonLBW (14.2%), T+SGA+LBW (7.1%), PT+LGA+nonLBW (1.6%), PT+LGA+LBW (0.2%), PT+AGA+nonLBW (3.7%), PT+AGA+LBW (3.6%) and PT+SGA+LBW (1.0%). The median prevalence of small types (six types, 37.6%) varied across studies and within regions and was higher in Southern Asia (52.4%) than in Sub-Saharan Africa (34.9%). CONCLUSIONS: Further investigation is needed to describe the mortality risks associated with newborn types and understand the implications of this framework for local targeting of interventions to prevent adverse pregnancy outcomes in LMICs

The Lancet Global Health Commission on Global Eye Health: vision beyond 2020

Eye health and vision have widespread and profound implications for many aspects of life, health, sustainable development, and the economy. Yet nowadays, many people, families, and populations continue to suffer the consequences of poor access to high-quality, affordable eye care, leading to vision impairment and blindness. In 2020, an estimated 596 million people had distance vision impairment worldwide, of whom 43 million were blind. Another 510 million people had uncorrected near vision impairment, simply because of not having reading spectacles. A large proportion of those affected (90%), live in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs). However, encouragingly, more than 90% of people with vision impairment have a preventable or treatable cause with existing highly cost-effective interventions. Eye conditions affect all stages of life, with young children and older people being particularly affected. Crucially, women, rural populations, and ethnic minority groups are more likely to have vision impairment, and this pervasive inequality needs to be addressed. By 2050, population ageing, growth, and urbanisation might lead to an estimated 895 million people with distance vision impairment, of whom 61 million will be blind. Action to prioritise eye health is needed now. This Commission defines eye health as maximised vision, ocular health, and functional ability, thereby contributing to overall health and wellbeing, social inclusion, and quality of life. Eye health is essential to achieve many of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Poor eye health and impaired vision have a negative effect on quality of life and restrict equitable access to and achievement in education and the workplace. Vision loss has substantial financial implications for affected individuals, families, and communities. Although high-quality data for global economic estimates are scarce, particularly for LMICs, conservative assessments based on the latest prevalence figures for 2020 suggest that annual global productivity loss from vision impairment is approximately US$410·7 billion purchasing power parity. Vision impairment reduces mobility, affects mental wellbeing, exacerbates risk of dementia, increases likelihood of falls and road traffic crashes, increases the need for social care, and ultimately leads to higher mortality rates. By contrast, vision facilitates many daily life activities, enables better educational outcomes, and increases work productivity, reducing inequality. An increasing amount of evidence shows the potential for vision to advance the SDGs, by contributing towards poverty reduction, zero hunger, good health and wellbeing, quality education, gender equality, and decent work. Eye health is a global public priority, transforming lives in both poor and wealthy communities. Therefore, eye health needs to be reframed as a development as well as a health issue and given greater prominence within the global development and health agendas. Vision loss has many causes that require promotional, preventive, treatment, and rehabilitative interventions. Cataract, uncorrected refractive error, glaucoma, age-related macular degeneration, and diabetic retinopathy are responsible for most global vision impairment. Research has identified treatments to reduce or eliminate blindness from all these conditions; the priority is to deliver treatments where they are most needed. Proven eye care interventions, such as cataract surgery and spectacle provision, are among the most cost-effective in all of health care. Greater financial investment is needed so that millions of people living with unnecessary vision impairment and blindness can benefit from these interventions. Lessons from the past three decades give hope that this challenge can be met. Between 1990 and 2020, the age-standardised global prevalence of blindness fell by 28·5%. Since the 1990s, prevalence of major infectious causes of blindness—onchocerciasis and trachoma—have declined substantially. Hope remains that by 2030, the transmission of onchocerciasis will be interrupted, and trachoma will be eliminated as a public health problem in every country worldwide. However, the ageing population has led to a higher crude prevalence of age-related causes of blindness, and thus an increased total number of people with blindness in some regions. Despite this progress, business as usual will not keep pace with the demographic trends of an ageing global population or address the inequities that persist in each country. New threats to eye health are emerging, including the worldwide increase in diabetic retinopathy, high myopia, retinopathy of prematurity, and chronic eye diseases of ageing such as glaucoma and age-related macular degeneration. With the projected increase in such conditions and their associated vision loss over the coming decades, urgent action is needed to develop innovative treatments and deliver services at a greater scale than previously achieved. Good eye health at the community and national level has been marginalised as a luxury available to only wealthy or urban areas. Eye health needs to be urgently brought into the mainstream of national health and development policy, planning, financing, and action. The challenge is to develop and deliver comprehensive eye health services (promotion, prevention, treatment, rehabilitation) that address the full range of eye conditions within the context of universal health coverage. Accessing services should not bring the risk of falling into poverty and services should be of high quality, as envisaged by the WHO framework for health-care quality: effective, safe, people-centred, timely, equitable, integrated, and efficient. To this framework we add the need for services to be environmentally sustainable. Universal health coverage is not universal without eye care. Multiple obstacles need to be overcome to achieve universal coverage for eye health. Important issues include complex barriers to availability and access to quality services, cost, major shortages and maldistribution of well-trained personnel, and lack of suitable, well maintained equipment and consumables. These issues are particularly widespread in LMICs, but also occur in underserved communities in high-income countries. Strong partnerships need to be formed with natural allies working in areas affected by eye health, such as non-communicable diseases, neglected tropical diseases, healthy ageing, children's services, education, disability, and rehabilitation. The eye health sector has traditionally focused on treatment and rehabilitation, and underused health promotion and prevention strategies to lessen the impact of eye disease and reduce inequality. Solving these problems will depend on solutions established from high quality evidence that can guide more effective implementation at scale. Evidence-based approaches will need to address existing deficiencies in the supply and demand. Strategic investments in discovery research, harnessing new findings from diverse fields, and implementation research to guide effective scale up are needed globally. Encouragingly, developments in telemedicine, mobile health, artificial intelligence, and distance learning could potentially enable eye care professionals to deliver higher quality care that is more plentiful, equitable, and cost-effective. This Commission did a Grand Challenges in Global Eye Health prioritisation exercise to highlight key areas for concerted research and action. This exercise has identified a broad set of challenges spanning the fields of epidemiology, health systems, diagnostics, therapeutics, and implementation. The most compelling of these issues, picked from among 3400 suggestions proposed by 336 people from 118 countries, can help to frame the future research agenda for global eye health. In this Commission, we harness lessons learned from over two decades, present the growing evidence for the life-transforming impact of eye care, and provide a thorough understanding of rapid developments in the field. This report was created through a broad consultation involving experts within and outside the eye care sector to help inform governments and other stakeholders about the path forward for eye health beyond 2020, to further the SDGs (including universal health coverage), and work towards a world without avoidable vision loss. The next few years are a crucial time for the global eye health community and its partners in health care, government, and other sectors to consider the successes and challenges encountered in the past two decades, and at the same time to chart a way forward for the upcoming decades. Moving forward requires building on the strong foundation laid by WHO and partners in VISION 2020 with renewed impetus to ultimately deliver high quality universal eye health care for all