A Prospective Analysis of the Simplified Student Sight Savers Program on Open-Angle Glaucoma Cost Burden in Underserved Communities

Capabilities and Limitations of Student-Led Free Vision Screening Programs in the United States

Purpose

The Consortium of Student-Led Eye Clinics (CSLEC), founded in 2021, administered a comprehensive survey to document the types of services, most common diagnoses, and follow-up care protocols offered by student-led free vision screening programs (SLFVSP) in the United States.

Methods

An 81-question institutional review board (IRB)-approved survey was administered to student-led vision screening eye clinics from October 1, 2022 to February 24, 2023.

Results

Sixteen SLFVSPs were included in the final analysis, of which 81% (n = 13) conducted variations of fundoscopic examinations and 75% (n = 12) measured intraocular pressure. Cataracts and diabetic retinopathy were reported as the most frequent diagnoses by the majority of SLFVSPs (n = 9, 56%); non-mobile SLFVSPs more commonly reported cataract as a frequent diagnosis (P < 0.05). Most patients screened at participating programs were uninsured or met federal poverty guidelines. Prescription glasses were offered by 56% of the programs (n = 9). SLFVSPs that directly scheduled follow-up appointments reported higher attendance rates (66.5%) than those that only sent referrals (20%). Transportation was the most cited barrier for follow-up appointment attendance.

Conclusions

SLFVSPs, one community vision screening initiative subtype, vary significantly in scope and capabilities of identifying vision threatening disease. The follow-up infrastructure is not uniformly robust and represents a key target for improving care delivery to at-risk populations.

Translational Relevance

The CSLEC aims to develop a consensus-based standardization for the scope of screening services, offer guidelines for diagnostic criteria, promote real-time data stewardship, and identify means to improve follow-up care mechanisms in member communities.

Assessment of Ophthalmology Teaching and its Impact on the Choice of Future Specialties Among Medical Students of Jazan University

BACKGROUND

Ophthalmology is essential for primary and specialty care physicians, as eye complaints are common, accounting for a sizable proportion of general practice consultations and emergency department visits. Fundamental ophthalmology knowledge is also relevant to other specialty fields. Thus, medical schools must provide effective undergraduate curricula to teach students about salient points, visual examination skills, emergency recognition, and referral indications. The International Council of Ophthalmology (ICO) has set guidelines that medical students should imbibe to become proficient in ophthalmology. However, there have been no recent investigations evaluating undergraduate ophthalmology education at Jazan University's Faculty of Medicine. Therefore, this study aimed to compare the curriculum at Jazan University to the ICO's requirements for undergraduate medical education.

METHODS

An observational cross-sectional study was conducted with both male and female student participants enrolled in an ophthalmology course at Jazan University's Faculty of Medicine. Following IRB approval, the questionnaire was distributed on social media to assess if Jazan University's undergraduate ophthalmology curriculum complies with ICO standards.

RESULTS

The study included a diverse sample of 322 participants, predominantly consisting of female students (n=178, 55.3%). The participants' ages ranged from 22 to 36 years, with the majority falling within the 24-25 year age range (n=173, 53.7%). Regarding academic performance, (n=117, 36.3%) of participants had a GPA of less than 4, while 66 (20.5%) had a GPA between 4.76 and 5.00. Among the respondents, 31 (9.6%) indicated having no exposure to ophthalmology, while 117 (36.3%) felt they had insufficient exposure. A considerable percentage of participants expressed competence in various areas, such as obtaining ocular history (n=113, 35.1%), testing visual acuity (n=201, 62.4%), and examining extraocular motility (n=201, 62.4%). In total, 98 participants (30.4%) expressed an interest in ophthalmology, while the majority (n=224, 69.6%) were not interested.

CONCLUSION

Essential improvements include increasing hands-on clinical experience, small-group learning, exposure across academic years, and early mentorship. Developing competency-based curricula aligned with ICO guidelines could significantly strengthen education. Better training quality and exposure will equip students with the necessary skills, boost confidence, and potentially expand the ophthalmology workforce.