Effective Low-Cost Ophthalmological Screening With a Novel iPhone Fundus Camera at Community Centers

Ophthalmologic care is inaccessible to many people due to a variety of factors, including the availability of providers, cost of equipment for ophthalmologic care, and transportation to clinics and appointments. Because many causes of blindness are both highly prevalent and preventable once identified, it is essential to address gaps in care for underserved populations. We developed a novel 3D-printed mobile retinal camera. In this study, we organized recurring student-run screening events around New York City that took place in community centers and churches, at which we utilized our device to take retinal images. Our screening events reached a diverse population of New Yorkers, disproportionately those with lower household income, many of whom had not had recent eye exams. To validate the device for use in telehealth ophthalmologic visits, we transmitted the images to a remote ophthalmologist for evaluation and compared the result with an on-site attending physician’s dilated eye exam. The subjective assessment indicated that 97% of images captured with the mobile retinal camera were acceptable for telehealth analysis. Remote image assessment by achieved 92% sensitivity and 83% specificity in detecting optic disc cupping, compared to the gold-standard on-site dilated eye exam. In addition, the device was portable, affordable, and able to be used by those with relatively little ophthalmologic training. We have demonstrated the utility of this affordable mobile retinal camera for telehealth ophthalmologic evaluation during community screening events that reached an underserved population to detect disease and connect with long-term care.

Minor Hematochezia Decreases Use of Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease

BACKGROUND

Despite increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) among hospitalized patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), pharmacologic prophylaxis rates remain low. We sought to understand the reasons for this by assessing factors associated with VTE prophylaxis in patients with IBD and the safety of its use.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study conducted among patients hospitalized between January 2013 and August 2018. The primary outcome was VTE prophylaxis, and exposures of interest included acute and chronic bleeding. Medical records were parsed electronically for covariables, and logistic regression was used to assess factors associated with VTE prophylaxis.

RESULTS

There were 22,499 patients studied, including 474 (2%) with IBD. Patients with IBD were less likely to be placed on VTE prophylaxis (79% with IBD, 87% without IBD), particularly if hematochezia was present (57% with hematochezia, 86% without hematochezia). Among patients with IBD, admission to a medical service and hematochezia (adjusted odds ratio 0.27; 95% CI, 0.16-0.46) were among the strongest independent predictors of decreased VTE prophylaxis use. Neither hematochezia nor VTE prophylaxis was associated with increased blood transfusion rates or with a clinically significant decline in hemoglobin level during hospitalization.

CONCLUSION

Hospitalized patients are less likely to be placed on VTE prophylaxis if they have IBD, and hematochezia may drive this. Hematochezia appeared to be minor and was unaffected by VTE prophylaxis. Education related to the safety of VTE prophylaxis in the setting of minor hematochezia may be a high-yield way to increase VTE prophylaxis rates in patients with IBD.