Ten years of glaucoma blindness in Fife 1990-99 and the implications for ophthalmology, optometry and rehabilitation services*

Progression to severe visual impairment and blindness in POAG patients: pace and risk factors—a cohort study using German health claims data

Objective

Glaucoma is a leading cause of severe visual impairment and blindness (SVI/B) worldwide. Hence, it is of utmost importance to explore relevant risk factors and study the pace of progression to SVI/B.

Methods and analysis

We used a random sample of 250 000 persons from administrative individual-level health records of the Allgemeine Ortskrankenkassen between 2004 and 2015. We identified 3535 primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG) patients aged 55 and older and followed them for up to 10 years. Monocular and binocular SVI/B were defined by the ICD-10 classifications H54.0 and H54.4. Ophthalmological and chronic disease risk factors were analysed by applying a multivariable Cox proportional hazard model.

Results

The risk of SVI/B in POAG patients was significantly increased by the presence of specific additional eye diseases such as secondary glaucoma (HR: 3.08, p<0.001), retinal vascular occlusion (HR: 3.00, p<0.001) or age-related macular degeneration (AMD) (HR: 2.26, p<0.001). The risk was highest in the first 2 years after the POAG diagnosis and significantly decreased after the fifth year (HR: 0.36, p=0.002). Ocular injuries, other ocular diseases, non-ophthalmological comorbidities, and age and sex had no significant influence (p>0.05).

Conclusion

Although progression to SVI/B is relatively rare in POAG patients in Germany, one must be aware of additional risk factors, such as secondary glaucoma, retinal vascular occlusion and AMD. Regular ophthalmological examinations help prevent the progression of SVI/B, especially in the first years after the POAG diagnosis. Specific, targeted, and timely treatments for the other eye diseases could help prevent or delay SVI/B.

What rates of glaucoma progression are clinically significant?

Clinically important rates of glaucoma progression (worsening) are ones that put a patient at risk of future functional impairment or reduction of vision-related quality of life. Rates of progression can be evaluated through measuring structural or functional changes of the optic nerve. Most treated eyes do not progress at rates that will lead to future visual impairment, but there are a significant proportion (3-17%) of eyes, that are at risk of impairment even under clinical care. While very fast rates of progression (e.g. MD progression of -1.5 dB/year) are generally problematic, much slower rates also may be deleterious for young patients, particularly those diagnosed with late disease. As a result, it is important to consider life expectancy, disease severity and vision-related quality of life based treatment targets to estimate future prognosis when evaluating whether a rate of glaucoma progression can be clinically relevant.

A comparative study of glaucoma referrals in Southeast Scotland: effect of the new general ophthalmic service contract, Eyecare integration pilot programme and NICE guidelines

Background

Glaucoma is a progressive disease responsible for the second commonest cause of blindness in the UK. Identifying appropriate patients for hospital care remains an ongoing challenge for all UK hospital glaucoma services. The purpose of our study is to evaluate accuracy and outcome of community optometry referrals before and after implementation of the new general ophthalmic service contract in 2006, the Eyecare Integration Programme pilot in 2008 and the effect of NICE guidelines in glaucoma in 2009, over a 12-year period

Methods

A retrospective case analysis using a glaucoma electronic patient record was performed encompassing two six-year periods, 2000–2006 (Group A), and 2007–2012 (Group B).

Results

One thousand six hundred twenty-two new patients’ records were analysed. Waiting times reduced from 12.3 to 9.4 weeks. Significantly more patients kept first appointment (p = 0.0002) in group B. Glaucoma symptoms were significantly more in group A (p <0.0001) and only three patients lost Snellen’ visual acuity before appointment in group B compared to 12 in group A. Documentation of intraocular pressure was made in 74.1 % of Group A and 75.9 % of Group B, optic disc appearance in 85.4 % of Group A, and 93 % of Group B and visual fields in 84.4 % of Group A and 81.3 % of Group B. Significantly less normal (p < 0,0001), more glaucoma suspects (p < 0.0001), more open angle glaucoma (p = 0.0006) and fewer other conditions (p = 0.0024) were present in group B, compared to group A.

Conclusion

Patients were referred earlier with shorter waiting times for hospital appointments with the new Scottish general ophthalmic service and Eyecare Integration Programme. Additionally there were fewer false positive referrals with more diagnosis of glaucomatous disease. We discuss the benefits of these national screening and referral pathways together with their limitations and further refinements.