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

Post COVID glaucoma service redesign utilising electronic patient triage and community optometry clinics (Fife, Scotland 2020-2022)

BACKGROUND

COVID-19 caused a huge backlog of patients in glaucoma clinics. This study describes redesign of an entire glaucoma service with electronic patient triage to three levels and utilisation of the Scottish optometry infrastructure of upskilled optometrists.

METHODS

2276 patients in glaucoma clinics were identified and triaged to three levels in keeping with Glauc-strat-fast guidance with local amendments. Every patient detail was entered into a bespoke glaucoma database to include demographics, clinical findings and social deprivation scores. The database generated automatic patient, GP and optometrist letters. Level one patients (482) were discharged within the Scottish general optometry service contract. Level two patients (714) were discharged to glaucoma accredited community optometry clinics. The glaucoma consultants would discuss the optometry decision making through screen share once a week. Level three patients (1080) were retained in hospital. All outcomes were audited and analysed 24 months after the new service.

RESULTS

Statistically significant parameters were found between the three groups, to include more normal eyes, less mean deviation on visual fields and less social deprivation in level one patients. After 24 months level one patients had a return rate of 40.2%, mainly for other diseases with only 20.4% retained within hospital or level two. 9.4% of level two patients returned to hospital with retention of only 2.7% in hospital at 24 months.

CONCLUSION

Glaucoma patients in Scotland can be appropriately triaged to glaucoma accredited community optometry clinics. This frees capacity within hospital to see patients with moderate and severe disease in a timely fashion, for best visual outcomes.

Systematic review of clinical practice guidelines for the diagnosis and management of retinal vein occlusion

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

To assess the methodological quality of Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPG) for the diagnosis and management of Retinal Vein Occlusion (RVO).

METHODS

A systematic review of CPGs for the diagnosis and management of RVO was carried out with a search in databases, metasearch engines, CPG development institutions, ophthalmology associations and CPG repositories until April 2022. Search update was performed on April 2023, with no new record available. Five CPGs published in the last 10 years in English/Spanish were selected, and 5 authors evaluated them independently, using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE-II) instrument. An individual assessment of each CPG by domain (AGREE-II), an overall assessment of the guide, and its use with or without modifications were performed. Additionally, a meta-synthesis of the recommendations for the most relevant outcomes was carried out.

RESULTS

The lowest score (mean 18.8%) was for domain 5 'applicability', and the highest score (mean 62%) was for domain 4 'clarity of presentation'. The 2019 American guideline (PPP) presented the best score (40.4%) in domain 3 'rigour of development'. When evaluating the overall quality of the CPGs analysed, all CPGs could be recommended with modifications. In the meta-synthesis, anti-VEGF therapy is the first-choice therapy for macular oedema associated with RVO, but there is no clear recommendation about the type of anti-VEGF therapy to choose. Recommendations for diagnosis and follow-up are similar among the CPGs appraised.

CONCLUSION

Most CPGs for the diagnosis and management of RVO have a low methodological quality assessed according to the AGREE-II. PPP has the higher score in the domain 'rigour of development'. Among the CPGs appraised, there is no clear recommendation on the type of anti-VEGF therapy to choose.

Referrals from community optometrists to the hospital eye service in Scotland and England

Objectives

This audit assesses communication between community optometrists (COs) and hospital eye service (HES) in Scotland and England.

Methods

Optometric referrals and replies were extracted from six practices in Scotland and England. If no reply was found, replies/records were copied from HES records. De-identified referrals, replies and records were audited against established standards, evaluating whether referrals were necessary, accurate and directed to the appropriate professional. The referral rate (RR) and referral reply rate (RRR) were calculated.

Results

From 905 de-identified referrals, RR ranged from 2.6 to 8.7%. From COs’ perspective, the proportion of referrals for which they received replies ranged from 37 to 84% (Scotland) and 26 to 49% (England). A total of 88–96% of referrals (Scotland) and 63–76% (England) were seen in the HES. Adjusting for cases when it is reasonable to expect replies, RRR becomes 45–92% (Scotland) and 38–62% (England) with RRR significantly greater in Scotland (P = 0.015). Replies were copied to patients in 0–21% of cases. Referrals were to the appropriate service and judged necessary in ≥90% of cases in both jurisdictions. Accuracy of referral ranged from 89 to 97% (Scotland) and 81 to 98% (England). The reply addressed the reason for referral in 94–100% of cases (Scotland) and 93–97% (England) and was meaningful in 95–100% (Scotland) and 94–99% (England).

Conclusions

Despite the interdisciplinary joint statement on sharing patient information, this audit highlights variable standard of referrals and deficits in replies to the referring COs, with one exception in Scotland. Replies from HES to COs are important for patient care, benefitting patients and clinicians and minimising unnecessary HES appointments.

Referrals from community optometrists to the hospital eye service in England

PURPOSE

In the UK, most referrals to the hospital eye service (HES) originate from community optometrists (CO). This audit investigates the quality of referrals, replies, and communication between CO and the HES.

METHODS

Optometric referrals and replies were extracted from three practices in England. If no reply letter was found, the records were searched at each local HES unit, and additional replies or records copied. De-identified referrals, replies and records were audited by a panel against established standards to evaluate whether the referrals were necessary, accurate and directed to the appropriate professional. The referral rate (RR) and referral reply rate (RRR) were calculated.

RESULTS

A total of 459 de-identified referrals were extracted. The RR ranged from 3.6%-8.7%. The proportion of referred patients who were seen in the HES unit was 63%-76%. From the CO perspective, the proportion of referrals for which they received replies ranged from 26%-49%. Adjusting the number of referrals for cases when it would be reasonable to expect an HES reply, RRR becomes 38%-62%. Patients received a copy of the reply in 3%-21% of cases. Referrals were made to the appropriate service in over 95% of cases, were judged necessary in 93%-97% and were accurate in 81%-98% of cases. The referral reply addressed the reason for the referral in 93%-97% and was meaningful in 94%-99% of cases. The most common conditions referred were glaucoma, cataract, anterior segment lesions, and neurological/ocular motor anomalies. The CO/HES dyad (pairing) in the area with the lowest average household income had the highest RR.

CONCLUSIONS

In contrast with the Royal College of Ophthalmologists/College of Optometrists joint statement on sharing patient information, CO referrals often do not elicit a reply to the referring CO. Replies from the HES to COs are important for patient care, benefitting patients and clinicians, and minimising unnecessary HES appointments.

The role of the disc damage likelihood scale in glaucoma detection by community optometrists

PURPOSE

Recent guidelines recommend disc damage likelihood scale (DDLS) is recorded for all referrals of suspected glaucoma from community optometrists to hospital eye services (HES) in Scotland. This study aimed to determine whether lower DDLS grades were associated with higher rates of discharge at the first visit to HES.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of 618 consecutive new referrals from community optometrists to a university hospital glaucoma service. 65 (10.5%) included DDLS graded by the community optometrist. A comprehensive eye examination and optical coherence tomography (OCT) was performed in the hospital glaucoma clinic and first visit discharge rate (FVDR) for different grades of DDLS compared. The relationship between DDLS and retinal nerve fibre layer (RNFL) thickness on OCT was also examined.

RESULTS

The FVDR for patients with DDLS recorded in the referral was 27.7% (18 of 65) compared to 25% (138 of 553) in those without DDLS (p = 0.631). The FVDR was 50% for those with a DDLS of 3 in the worse eye, decreasing to 32% and 21% for DDLS grades of 4 and 5 respectively. No patient with a DDLS ≥ 6 was discharged at the first visit and none with a DDLS < 4 (the cut off for consideration of referral in Scottish guidelines) were found to have glaucoma. There was a significant but weak inverse relationship between DDLS and RNFL thickness. The strongest relationship was with average RNFL thickness (r = -0.378, p < 0.01) followed by superotemporal (r = -0.359, p < 0.01) and inferotemporal (r = -0.353, p < 0.01) RNFL thickness.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients referred to HES with DDLS information included, lower DDLS grading was associated with higher odds of being discharged at the first visit. DDLS grading by community optometrists had a poor correlation with RNFL thickness measured using OCT.

Optometrist referrals to an emergency ophthalmology department: a retrospective review to identify current practise and development of shared care working strategies, in England

BACKGROUND

Direct referrals from optometrists account for up to 10% eye casualty attendances. Despite this, there remains a paucity of literature on optometrist referrals to eye casualty. A better understanding of these referrals could be helpful in the development of shared care emergency pathways. Diagnostic agreement between optometrists and ophthalmologists for emergency referrals can be used to identify areas for development of shared care working strategies in emergency ophthalmology.

METHODS

A retrospective evaluation of 1059 consecutive optometric emergency referrals to Moorfields Eye Hospital was conducted. Referrals were only included when a letter or documentation for the reason for referral was provided. Diagnostic information from the referring optometrist and casualty doctor was summarised for each patient by an investigator (VMT) and recorded on a single spreadsheet. These clinical summaries were compared by a second independent investigator (IJ) and marked as agreeing, disagreeing or uncertain. Each clinical summary was then mapped to a diagnostic category using key word searches which were manually re-checked against the original summaries. Information on the timing of the referral and the outcome at the emergency department visit was also collated. Inter-observer agreement for diagnostic categories was measured using kappa coefficients.

RESULTS

Diagnostic agreement ranged between kappa 0.59 and 0.87. It was best for diagnoses within the red eye category (kappa 0.87). Compliance with College of Optometrists referral guidance ranged between 11 and 100%. More than half of referrals for elevated intra-ocular pressure were discharged at the eye casualty visit. Overall, 54% of patients were managed with advice alone, 39% required treatment following referral and 7% required onward referral from eye casualty.

CONCLUSION

The majority of patients referred by optometrists were managed with advice alone. A collaborative approach at the point referral could be helpful to improve referral efficiency.

Impact of referral refinement on management of glaucoma suspects in Australia

BACKGROUND

In ageing populations, the prevalence of chronic diseases such as glaucoma is projected to increase, placing additional demands on limited health-care resources. In the UK, the demand for secondary care in hospital eye clinics was inflated by high rates of false positive glaucoma referrals. Collaborative care models incorporating referral refinement, whereby glaucoma suspect referrals are triaged by suitably trained optometrists through further testing, can potentially reduce false positive referrals. This study examined the impact of a referral refinement model on the accuracy of glaucoma referrals in Australia.

METHODS

Optometrist-initiated glaucoma suspect referrals to the Glaucoma Management Clinic (Sydney, Australia) were prospectively recruited. Glaucoma suspect referrals arising from two pathways were eligible for inclusion, either directly from a community optometrist (standard care) or following comprehensive assessment at the Centre for Eye Health (referral refinement). Main outcome measures were the positive predictive value and false positive rate of referrals. The impact of referral letter content on management outcomes was also investigated.

RESULTS

Of 464 referrals received between March 2015 and June 2018, 252 were for treatment of naïve glaucoma suspects and eligible for inclusion. Following ophthalmological assessment, 45.6 per cent (n = 115/252) were prescribed treatment for open angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension. Positive predictive value of community optometry referrals was 33.8 per cent (n = 25/74) and 50.6 per cent (n = 90/178) following referral refinement. The first visit discharge (false positive) rate was 26 per cent (n = 19/74) for community referrals compared to four per cent (n = 8/178) with referral refinement. Positive predictive value increased with the number of abnormal clinical examination findings associated with referral (χ² test, p < 0.0001). The number of abnormal findings reported in referrals was significantly higher with referral refinement compared to without (n = 1.9 versus 1.5, t-test, p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

Referral refinement can improve the diagnostic accuracy of optometry-initiated referrals for glaucoma suspects in Australia, thereby decreasing unnecessary referrals to hospital and other secondary clinics.

Care pathways for glaucoma detection and monitoring in the UK

Glaucoma presents considerable challenges in providing clinically and cost-effective care pathways. While UK population screening is not seen as justifiable, arrangements for case finding have historically been considered relatively ineffective. Detection challenges include an undetected disease burden, whether from populations failing to access services or difficulties in delivering effective case-finding strategies, and a high false positive rate from referrals via traditional case finding pathways. The enhanced General Ophthalmic Service (GOS) in Scotland and locally commissioned glaucoma referral filtering services (GRFS) elsewhere have undoubtedly reduced false positive referrals, and there is emerging evidence of effectiveness of these pathways. At the same time, it is recognised that implementing GRFS does not intrinsically reduce the burden of undetected glaucoma and late presentation, and obvious challenges remain. In terms of diagnosis and monitoring, considerable growth in capacity remains essential, and non-medical health care professional (HCP) co-management and virtual clinics continue to be important solutions in offering requisite capacity. National guidelines, commissioning recommendations, and the Common Clinical Competency Framework have clarified requirements for such services, including recommendations on training and accreditation of HCPs. At the same time, the nature of consultant-delivered care and expectations on the glaucoma specialist's role has evolved alongside these developments. Despite progress in recent decades, given projected capacity requirements, further care pathways innovations appear mandated. While the timeline for implementing potential artificial intelligence innovations in streamlining care pathways is far from established, the glaucoma burden presents an expectation that such developments will need to be at the vanguard of future developments.

Systematic review of the appropriateness of eye care delivery in eye care practice

BACKGROUND

Health care systems are continually being reformed, however care improvement and intervention effectiveness are often assumed, not measured. This paper aimed to review findings from published studies about the appropriateness of eye care delivery, using existing published evidence and/or experts' practice and to describe the methods used to measure appropriateness of eye care.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted using Medline, Embase and CINAHL (2006 to September 2016). Studies reporting the processes of eye care delivery against existing published evidence and/or experts' practice were selected. Data was extracted from published reports and the methodological quality using a modified critical appraisal tool. The primary outcomes were percentage of appropriateness of eye care delivery. This study was registered with PROSPERO, reference CRD42016049974.

RESULTS

Fifty-seven studies were included. Most studies assessed glaucoma and diabetic retinopathy and the overall methodological quality for most studies was moderate. The ranges of appropriateness of care delivery were 2-100% for glaucoma, 0-100% for diabetic retinopathy and 0-100% for other miscellaneous conditions. Published studies assessed a single ocular condition, a sample from a single centre or a single domain of care, but no study has attempted to measure the overall appropriateness of eye care delivery.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings indicated a wide range of appropriateness of eye care delivery, for glaucoma and diabetic eye care. Future research would benefit from a comprehensive approach where appropriateness of eye care is measured across multiple conditions with a single methodology, to guide priorities within eye care delivery and monitor quality improvement initiatives.

Digital ophthalmology in Scotland: benefits to patient care and education

Tackling visual impairment remains an important public health issue. Due to limited resources and the increasing demand on hospital eye services (HES), delivery of quality eye care within the community is essential. Training of clinical ophthalmic specialists and allied health-care professionals in the detection and management of common eye conditions can thus help to reduce the burden of eye disease and improve prognostic outcomes. Digital imaging has become a useful tool in facilitating eye-care delivery in both the community and hospital setting. In the last decade, the advent of electronic image exchange via a centralized referral unit in Scotland has revolutionized screening for ophthalmic disease, referrals, and shared care between community and HES clinicians. A government-led initiative known as the Scottish Eyecare Integration Project introduced electronic transfer of digital images within referrals from community optometrists to HES, which greatly reduced outpatient waiting times and improved patient satisfaction. The catalogue of live clinical information and digital images that resulted from the project led to the creation of a virtual learning platform through the University of Edinburgh. Participating professionals involved in eye care have interactive discussions about common eye conditions by sharing digital images of cases and investigations on a global online platform. This has received worldwide attention and inspired the creation of other university courses, e-learning platforms in eye-health education, and shared-care schemes in the screening of eye disease. We show that digital ophthalmology plays a vital role in the integration of community and HES partnership in delivery of patient care and in facilitating eye-health education to a global audience.

The impact of SIGN glaucoma guidelines on false-positive referrals from community optometrists in Central Scotland

Background

Since the introduction of National Institute for Health and Care Excellence glaucoma guidelines 2009, the number of referrals from community optometrists to hospital eye services has increased across the UK, resulting in increase in first visit discharge rates (FVDRs).

Aim

To assess the impact of Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) 144 on quality of referrals from community optometrists.

Methodology

A retrospective study of patient records who attended as new adult glaucoma referrals to clinics in Princess Alexandra Eye Pavilion, Edinburgh, and in Greater Glasgow and Clyde, was carried out across October–November 2014 (group 1) and September–October 2016 (group 2), before and after the introduction of SIGN 144. The primary outcome of this study is FVDRs. A secondary outcome is the extent of compliance to referral recommendations by SIGN guidelines.

Results

Three hundred and twelve and 325 patients were included in groups 1 and 2, respectively. There was a significant decline in FVDRs between these two periods from 29.2% to 19.2%. (p=0.004) (OR 0.58 (95%CI 0.40 to 0.84)). Post-SIGN guidelines, 87% of referrals were compliant to SIGN referral criteria while 13% remained non-compliant. The main reasons for non-compliance were no repeatable visual field defects (42.0%) and referrals due to high intraocular pressure were either not repeated or not interpreted in the context of age and central corneal thickness (36.8%).

Conclusion

Patients referred after the introduction of SIGN guidelines were 33.5% less likely to be discharged at the first visit. Although compliance to most recommendations in SIGN guidelines has improved, there is still a need to improve adherence to referral criteria