Search

Background: Documented inequalities in access to eye care for people with learning disabilities and/or autism are caused by poor uptake of primary eye care services, poor identification of eye problems, lack of signposting and reasonable adjustments of existing services, concerns about costs of care and the low priority historically given to these issues in eye care policy at a regional and national level. In 2019, the charity SeeAbility employed four eye care champions (ECCs) with lived experience of learning disability and/or autism to work in local communities in London and the Northwest of England. They provided peer‐to‐peer support on understanding the need for good eye health and engaged with policy makers, and learning disability, autism and eye care professionals at the local, regional and national levels to influence both the clinical practice of individual practitioners (within existing service/pathway models) and more widely to influence the commissioning of the Easy Eye Care pathway. This study explores the experiences of these ECCs. Methods: The study was conducted in April and May 2023. A case study approach was used to describe the experiences of the ECCs from March 2019 to March 2023. Data from structured interviews with the four ECCs and workload analysis were triangulated to provide a multifaceted understanding of this novel health promotion project. Findings: The ECCs found the role useful and reported that confidence in their practice and impact grew with time but they required ongoing support in the role. A good understanding of the promotional messages was reported. Developing a good network of contacts at an early stage, both people with learning disabilities and healthcare professionals, was key. Relationships with professionals were supportive and positive and a positive emotive response to their lived experience was reported in these interactions. Conclusions: From the perspective of the ECCs, the role is useful and beneficial. The work suggests some key recommendations for future development which include planning to build networks, support in presentation and communications skills and defining key messages and knowledge. Confidence of the ECCs builds with time in the role but also needs support the emotive impact of their lived experiences on audiences is highlighted. There is a need to evaluate how the programme is perceived by those who interact with it and how it changes behaviours which leads to better health outcomes. Accessible Summaries: People with learning disabilities are 10 times more likely than other people to have a problem with their eyes but less likely to get the eye care they need.This paper explains how people with a learning disability and/or autism are employed to tell other people with learning disabilities and/or autism, their supporters, health and care professionals and people who plan services about how important it is to get regular eye care. This job is an 'Eye Care Champion'.We share what the eye care champions did in their role, what worked well and what did not.We discuss how what we have learnt can help other people with learning disabilities and/or autism work as eye care champions and perhaps as champions for other areas of healthcare. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Good vision during childhood is vital for visual, educational, and social development. Previous research highlights challenges in the accessibility of eye care for children. This study investigates the accessibility of primary eye care for young children with typical development and those with autism in England. Methods: A telephone survey was conducted using four hypothetical scenarios (a child aged 1, 3, 5 years and a 13‐year‐old with autism). Four hundred community optometric practices (100 different practices for each scenario) were contacted to explore the availability of an eye examination. The caller acted as a parent, asking about the availability of an eye examination for their child and raising concerns regarding the child. Key barriers and enablers to the accessibility of primary eye care were identified through an analysis of qualitative information. Results: Of the 400 practices, only three (<1%) stated that they do not perform eye examinations on children. Fifty‐six practices (14%) stated that they would examine a child at any age, the remainder (n = 341, 85%) specifying a minimum age at which they would perform eye examinations on children. Lack of 'communication' from the child and 'equipment' were identified as barriers to accessing eye care for young children. Eye care for children with autism was enabled by factors related to adaptability and appointment time. Conclusion: Our results suggest that communication and a lack of appropriate equipment for examining children are potential barriers to accessing primary eye care. No clear barriers were identified for an older child with autism. Eye examinations are more accessible for older children in these scenarios (aged 5 with typical development and 13 years with autism) than younger children (aged 1 and 3 years old). While the UK General Ophthalmic Services (GOS) terms do not permit contract holders to exclude categories of patients from a GOS eye exam, our findings suggest this is taking place. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]