Background: The COVID-19 pandemic taught us how to rethink care delivery. It catalyzed creative solutions to amplify the potential of personnel and facilities. This paper presents and evaluates a promptly introduced triaging solution that evolved into a tool to tackle the ever-growing waiting lists at an academic ophthalmology department, the TeleTriageTeam (TTT). A team of undergraduate optometry students, tutor optometrists, and ophthalmologists collaborate to maintain continuity of eye care. In this ongoing project, we combine innovative interprofessional task allocation, teaching, and remote care delivery. Objective: In this paper, we described a novel approach, the TTT; reported its clinical effectiveness and impact on waiting lists; and discussed its transformation to a sustainable method for delivering remote eye care. Methods: Real-world clinical data of all patients assessed by the TTT between April 16, 2020, and December 31, 2021, are covered in this paper. Business data on waiting lists and patient portal access were collected from the capacity management team and IT department of our hospital. Interim analyses were performed at different time points during the project, and this study presents a synthesis of these analyses. Results: A total of 3658 cases were assessed by the TTT. For approximately half (1789/3658, 48.91%) of the assessed cases, an alternative to a conventional face-to-face consultation was found. The waiting lists that had built up during the first months of the pandemic diminished and have been stable since the end of 2020, even during periods of imposed lockdown restrictions and reduced capacity. Patient portal access decreased with age, and patients who were invited to perform a remote, web-based eye test at home were on average younger than patients who were not invited. Conclusions: Our promptly introduced approach to remotely review cases and prioritize urgency has been successful in maintaining continuity of care and education throughout the pandemic and has evolved into a telemedicine service that is of great interest for future purposes, especially in the routine follow-up of patients with chronic diseases. TTT appears to be a potentially preferred practice in other clinics and medical specialties. The paradox is that judicious clinical decision-making based on remotely collected data is possible, only if we as caregivers are willing to change our routines and cognitions regarding face-to-face care delivery.
LINK
Doelstelling: In kaart brengen van de risicofactoren voor het ontwikkelen van binoculaire diplopie na conventionele monovisie door middel van contactlenzen of refractiechirurgie bij presbyopen. Methode: Voor deze literatuurstudie is in maart 2017 gezocht in databanken Pubmed, ScienceDirect en Google Scholar. Artikelen zijn geïncludeerd als binoculaire diplopie door monovisie wordt beschreven. Alle patiënten die worden weergegeven in deze artikelen zijn ouder dan 40 jaar en hebben monovisie door middel van contactlenzen of refractiechirurgie. De resultaten beschrijven de oorzaken van de binoculaire diplopie, de voorgeschiedenis van de patiënt met betrekking tot strabismus en de hoogte van additie. Onderscheid wordt gemaakt tussen contactlensdragers en patiënten die refractiechirurgie hebben ondergaan. Resultaten: In deze literatuurstudie zijn zes artikelen verwerkt. Uit deze artikelen zijn 35 patiënten met binoculaire diplopie meegenomen in dit onderzoek, vijftien patiënten met contactlens geïnduceerde monovisie en twintig patiënten met refractiechirurgie geïnduceerde monovisie. De oorzaken van binoculaire diplopie (decompensatie van een heteroforie, een intermitterend strabismus die constant wordt, een verworven heterotropie, decompensatie van een N IV parese en fixation switch diplopie) geven geen grote verschillen in aantal patiënten. Een additie hoger dan twee dioptrie komt meer voor in deze patiëntengroep met binoculaire diplopie dan een lagere additie. Een positieve voorgeschiedenis met betrekking tot strabismus komt meer voor dan een negatieve voorgeschiedenis. Relevante verschillen tussen contactlensdragers en patiënten die refractiechirurgie hebben ondergaan zijn niet gevonden. Conclusie: Vanwege het gebrek aan consistente data is meer onderzoek nodig voor significante resultaten.
Purpose: To establish age-related, normal limits of monocular and binocular spatial vision under photopic and mesopic conditions. Methods: Photopic and mesopic visual acuity (VA) and contrast thresholds (CTs) were measured with both positive and negative contrast optotypes under binocular and monocular viewing conditions using the Acuity-Plus (AP) test. The experiments were carried out on participants (age range from 10 to 86 years), who met pre-established, normal sight criteria. Mean and ± 2.5σ limits were calculated within each 5-year subgroup. A biologically meaningful model was then fitted to predict mean values and upper and lower threshold limits for VA and CT as a function of age. The best-fit model parameters describe normal aging of spatial vision for each of the 16 experimental conditions investigated. Results: Out of the 382 participants recruited for this study, 285 participants passed the selection criteria for normal aging. Log transforms were applied to ensure approximate normal distributions. Outliers were also removed for each of the 16 stimulus conditions investigated based on the ±2.5σ limit criterion. VA, CTs and the overall variability were found to be age-invariant up to ~50 years in the photopic condition. A lower, age-invariant limit of ~30 years was more appropriate for the mesopic range with a gradual, but accelerating increase in both mean thresholds and intersubject variability above this age. Binocular thresholds were smaller and much less variable when compared to the thresholds measured in either eye. Results with negative contrast optotypes were significantly better than the corresponding results measured with positive contrast (p < 0.004). Conclusions: This project has established the expected age limits of spatial vision for monocular and binocular viewing under photopic and high mesopic lighting with both positive and negative contrast optotypes using a single test, which can be implemented either in the clinic or in an occupational setting.
