PURPOSE: To determine whether the outcome of primary retinal reattachment surgery in a subregion is improved by surgery being performed in a specialist vitreoretinal unit (VRU). METHODS: A subregional, population-based, retrospective audit cycle of primary retinal reattachment surgery was conducted by independent investigators. The subregion was defined as the catchment area of a teaching hospital (TH) with a specialist VRU and three neighbouring district general hospitals (DGHs). During the initial audit period (January 1989 to December 1990), 142 cases were treated at all four hospitals: TH/VRU (83), DGH-A (15), DGH-B (13), and DGH-C (31). Policy changes after the initial audit led to primary retinal reattachment surgery being predominantly performed by the VRU. During the re-audit period (September 1995 to August 1997), 160 cases were treated at two hospitals: VRU (148) and DGH-C (12). The outcome measure employed was complete retinal reattachment after a single procedure with a minimum follow-up of 12 months. RESULTS: The success rate for primary retinal reattachment surgery in the subregion improved from 76.1% to 88.8% (p = 0.006) following the policy changes. The success rate of the vitreoretinal specialists in the VRU (90%) was greater than the general ophthalmologists in the DGHs (ranging from 47% to 77%), despite case selection by the general ophthalmologists. The number of cases treated by the VRU increased by 156% in the 6.5 year interval between the two audits due to a widespread change in the model of care for primary retinal detachments (both within and outside the subregion). During the re-audit period, the VRU treated 348 primary retinal detachments (including referrals from outside the subregion), achieving a success rate of 86.8% with a single procedure and 97.4% with further surgery. This primary success rate included 35 cases (10%) treated by vitrectomy with silicone oil tamponade who did not undergo silicone oil removal. CONCLUSIONS: The outcome of primary retinal reattachment surgery can be improved if surgery is performed by a specialist VRU. It is suggested that the current standard for retinal reattachment with a single procedure should be set in the region of 85% to 90%. Changing the model of care so that primary retinal reattachment surgery is predominantly performed by a specialist VRU has important resource implications.
PURPOSE: To determine whether the outcome of primary retinal reattachment surgery in a subregion is improved by surgery being performed in a specialist vitreoretinal unit (VRU). METHODS: A subregional, population-based, retrospective audit cycle of primary retinal reattachment surgery was conducted by independent investigators. The subregion was defined as the catchment area of a teaching hospital (TH) with a specialist VRU and three neighbouring district general hospitals (DGHs). During the initial audit period (January 1989 to December 1990), 142 cases were treated at all four hospitals: TH/VRU (83), DGH-A (15), DGH-B (13), and DGH-C (31). Policy changes after the initial audit led to primary retinal reattachment surgery being predominantly performed by the VRU. During the re-audit period (September 1995 to August 1997), 160 cases were treated at two hospitals: VRU (148) and DGH-C (12). The outcome measure employed was complete retinal reattachment after a single procedure with a minimum follow-up of 12 months. RESULTS: The success rate for primary retinal reattachment surgery in the subregion improved from 76.1% to 88.8% (p = 0.006) following the policy changes. The success rate of the vitreoretinal specialists in the VRU (90%) was greater than the general ophthalmologists in the DGHs (ranging from 47% to 77%), despite case selection by the general ophthalmologists. The number of cases treated by the VRU increased by 156% in the 6.5 year interval between the two audits due to a widespread change in the model of care for primary retinal detachments (both within and outside the subregion). During the re-audit period, the VRU treated 348 primary retinal detachments (including referrals from outside the subregion), achieving a success rate of 86.8% with a single procedure and 97.4% with further surgery. This primary success rate included 35 cases (10%) treated by vitrectomy with silicone oil tamponade who did not undergo silicone oil removal. CONCLUSIONS: The outcome of primary retinal reattachment surgery can be improved if surgery is performed by a specialist VRU. It is suggested that the current standard for retinal reattachment with a single procedure should be set in the region of 85% to 90%. Changing the model of care so that primary retinal reattachment surgery is predominantly performed by a specialist VRU has important resource implications.