Search

Introduction: Patients with advanced age‐related macular degeneration (AMD) frequently experience loss to follow‐up (LTFU), heightening the risk of vision loss from treatment delays. This study aimed to identify factors contributing to LTFU in patients with advanced AMD and assess the effectiveness of telephone‐based outreach in reconnecting them with eye care. Methods: A custom reporting tool identified patients with advanced AMD who had not returned for eye care between 31 October 2021 and 1 November 2022. Potentially LTFU patients were enrolled in a telephone outreach programme conducted by a telehealth extender to encourage their return for care. Linear regression analysis identified factors associated with being LTFU and likelihood of accepting care post‐outreach. Results: Out of 1269 patients with advanced AMD, 105 (8.3%) did not return for recommended eye care. Patients LTFU were generally older (89.2 ± 8.9 years vs. 87.2 ± 8.5 years, p = 0.02) and lived farther from the clinic (25 ± 43 miles vs. 17 ± 30 miles, p = 0.009). They also had a higher rate of advanced dry AMD (26.7% vs. 18.5%, p = 0.04) and experienced worse vision in both their better‐seeing (0.683 logMAR vs. 0.566 logMAR, p = 0.03) and worse‐seeing (1.388 logMAR vs. 1.235 logMAR, p = 0.04) eyes. Outreach by a telehealth extender reached 62 patients (59%), 43 through family members or healthcare proxies. Half of the cases where a proxy was contacted revealed that the patient in question had died. Among those contacted directly, one third expressed willingness to resume eye care (20 patients), with 11 scheduling appointments (55%). Despite only two patients returning for in‐person eye care through the intervention, the LTFU rate halved to 4.4% by accounting for those patients who no longer needed eye care at the practice. Conclusions: There is a substantial risk that older patients with advanced AMD will become LTFU. Targeted telephone outreach can provide a pathway for vulnerable patients to return to care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose:To assess the effectiveness and financial implications of employing a telehealth physician extender program to re-engage patients with diabetic retinopathy (DR) who are lost to follow-up (LTF). Methods:Established patients with DR unevaluated in the prior 12 months were identified as LTF, and randomized to receive a recall intervention or standard operating procedure (SOP). For the intervention, a telehealth physician extender performed outbound calls, offering each patient a symptom screening questionnaire following a physician-directed escalation pathway and assistance in scheduling a return appointment. All patients retained the ability to schedule an appointment by means of SOP. Appointment schedule and adherence rates were assessed 30 days after a 6-week intervention period. Call times were digitally measured to estimate intervention labor cost. Results:Four hundred twenty-five of 2,514 established patients with DR were LTF (17%). One hundred fifty-seven patients were assigned to the intervention group; the remaining 268 formed the SOP group. Sixty-six outbound calls reached patients (42%). At the time of program assessment, the intervention group demonstrated a higher rate of appointment scheduling (31% vs. 14%, p < 0.001) and adherence (14% vs. 7%, p = 0.020). The measured call duration was 2.3 ± 1.9 min, yielding an estimated cost of US$4.70 per appointment scheduled. Conclusion:Re-engagement by a telehealth physician extender improves the rate at which patients with DR return for eye care, and can be done at a reasonable cost. This method of improving adherence with follow-up should be readily translatable to other health care settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The emergence of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) forced many eye care providers to implement telehealth services while in-person visits were reserved for essential and/or emergency eye care. Objective: This study documents how an optometry group successfully implemented telehealth to care for patients during the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States. Design: Retrospective, comparative case series. Methods: Records were reviewed for patients seen in an academic optometry clinic from 23 March through 7 April 2020, the period of the Massachusetts stay-at-home advisory issued in response to COVID-19. Patients who completed telehealth visits were compared with those who received in-person care. Services delivered by telehealth included a check of symptoms, medication refills, health education, and assurance of future follow up. The study took into account the reason for each visit, as well as the rate of scheduled and completed follow-up appointments. Patient satisfaction with in-person care was evaluated by Press Ganey patient experience surveys. Results: Out of 855 patients scheduled, 421 patients completed telehealth encounters (49%), and 46 patients completed in-clinic visits (5.4%). A further 272 patients canceled appointments (32%), 123 patients were unable to be contacted (14%), and 8 patients declined care offered by telehealth (0.94%). Most patients who were cared for by telehealth returned to see optometrists (88%). By contrast, most patients who required in-person visits during this period were subsequently seen by ophthalmologists (58%, p < 0.001). Patient satisfaction remained high for in-person visits that took place during the COVID-19-related emergency, with improvements noted in patient satisfaction regarding 'information about delays' (47 % versus 100%, p = 0.007) and 'concern for questions or worries' (76% versus 100%, p = 0.037) compared with the same period 1 year prior. Conclusion: Optometrists rapidly embraced telehealth to deliver eye care to their patients during the COVID-19 public health emergency. Most eye issues were able to be addressed through telehealth; urgent eye problems were triaged and referred to the optometry clinic, when appropriate. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: This study describes the implementation of an electronic medical record (EMR)‐based initiative aimed at identifying and reducing the number of patients with diabetic retinopathy (DR) lost to follow‐up (LTF). Method: Providers were enlisted to review the EMRs and re‐engage patients with DR seen 1 year prior and who had not returned for care within the past 6 months. Binary logistic regression analysis was used to identify demographic, clinical and sociomedical factors associated with being LTF, as well as those predictive of re‐engagement. Results: Out of 673 patients with DR, 78 (12%) were identified as LTF. Patients LTF were more likely to be younger (p = 0.001) and have poorly controlled haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c ≥ 8%, p = 0.04) and cholesterol (LDL ≥ 100 mg/dL, p < 0.001) levels. These patients were also more likely to have completed fewer ophthalmology appointments (p < 0.001), and less likely to have had retinal imaging within the last year (p < 0.001). Charts reviewed 1 month after the EMR‐based initiative revealed that 22 patients (28%) had been successfully re‐engaged by providers, while 56 patients (72%) remained LTF. History of prior treatment for DR was associated with re‐engagement by providers (p = 0.04). One month following the provider‐based intervention, the LTF rate dropped to 8.3%, and by 1 year only 3.6% of the patients remained LTF. Conclusions: Electronic medical record‐based tools can successfully identify DR patients as being LTF, offering an opportunity for providers to re‐engage patients in a timely manner. Future studies are needed to determine the long‐term impact of patient re‐engagement on DR outcomes and efficiency of clinical practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The COVID-19 pandemic had a disproportionate impact on patients from racial and/or ethnic minority groups, causing many to delay healthcare. This study evaluates the role telehealth visits played in helping patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) return for subsequent, in-person eye examinations after the outbreak of COVID-19. Methods: This retrospective, cross-sectional study analyzed 8147 patients with DM who had completed an outpatient ophthalmology and/or optometry visit in 2019 and who were due for return evaluation after the outbreak of COVID-19 in 2020. Factors associated with return for subsequent, in-person eye examination were assessed. Results: The mean age of patients was 68.8 (± 13.0) years, and 42% were women. 7.4% of patients identified as Asian; 2.9% as Black; 3.4% as Hispanic or Latin American; 0.92%, as more than one race; 1.78%, as other races; and 80.7% as White. Patients from racial and/or ethnic minority groups completed fewer in-person eye examinations after the outbreak of COVID-19 compared with White patients (35.6% versus 44.5%, χ2=36.172, P< 0.001). However, both groups accessed telehealth services at a similar rate during this period (21.1% versus 21.9%, χ2=0.417, P=0.518). Importantly, patients who received telehealth services returned for subsequent, in-person eye examinations at substantially higher rates, regardless of race (51.0% and 46.6%, respectively, χ2=1.840, P=0.175). This offset the otherwise lower rate of return experienced by patients from racial and/or ethnic minority groups compared with White patients among the group of patients who did not receive any telehealth services (32.7% versus 42.7%, χ2=36.582, P< 0.001). The impact of telehealth on the likelihood of in-person return remained significant after taking into account age, gender, race, language, residence, severity of diabetic retinopathy (DR), and vision in a multivariate model. Conclusion: Telehealth initiatives benefited patients from racial and/or ethnic minority groups by reducing disparities in access to eye care experienced during the COVID-19 pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The 2013 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association cholesterol guideline recommends moderate to high-intensity statin therapy in patients with peripheral artery disease (PAD) and ischemic cerebrovascular disease (ICVD). We examined frequency and facility-level variation in any statin prescription and in guideline-concordant statin prescriptions in patients with PAD and ICVD receiving primary care in 130 facilities across the Veterans Affairs (VA) health care system between October 2013 and September 2014. Guideline-concordant statin intensity was defined as the prescription of high-intensity statins in patients with PAD or ICVD =75 years and at least moderate-intensity statins in those >75 years. We calculated median rate ratios (MRR) after adjusting for patient demographic factors to assess the magnitude of facility-level variation in statin prescribing patterns independent of patient characteristics. Among 194,151 PAD patients, 153,438 patients (79.0%) were prescribed any statin and 79,435 (40.9%) were prescribed a guidelineconcordant intensity of statin. PAD patients without ischemic heart disease were prescribed any statin and a guidelineconcordant intensity of statin therapy less frequently (69.1% and 28.9%, respectively). Among 339,771 ICVD patients, 265,491 (78.1%) were prescribed any statin and 136,430 (40.2%) were prescribed a guideline-concordant intensity of statin. ICVD patients without ischemic heart disease were prescribed any statin and a guideline-concordant intensity of statin less frequently (70.9% and 30.5%, respectively). MRRs for both PAD and ICVD patients demonstrated a 20% and 28% variation among two facilities in treating two identical patients with statin therapy and guideline-concordant intensity of statin therapy, respectively. The prescription of statins, especially guideline-recommended intensity of statin therapy, is suboptimal in PAD and ICVD patients, with significant facility-level variation not explained by patient-level factors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]