Literature DB >> 18600247

Impact of direct electronic optometric referral with ocular imaging to a hospital eye service.

J R Cameron1, S Ahmed, P Curry, G Forrest, R Sanders.   

Abstract

AIMS: A study to assess the feasibility, safety, and clinical effectiveness of electronic referral--with and without images--of patients directly from optometrists in primary care to the hospital eye service (HES) in contrast to the traditional paper-based referral, through the general practitioner (GP).
METHODS: Three optometry practices sent consecutive referrals with images through the NHS Net to the HES. The standard General Ophthalmic Service form was electronically redesigned with additional information on patient choice for advice, appointment, or surgery. All paper referrals to the HES from the same three optometry practices before the study period were analysed (control group A) as were all paper referrals from the remaining optometrists in Fife (control group B).
RESULTS: A total of 346 electronic referrals were received over 18 months. 218 (63%) were classified as requiring and 128 (37%) as not requiring a HES appointment. The latter were subsequently examined with unexpected pathology found in three cases (glaucoma, macular pigment epithelial detachment, and possible peripheral retinal tear). In both groups, the major pathologies reported were macular degeneration, cataract, glaucoma, diabetic retinopathy, and abnormal retinal appearances. A total of 17 (15%) patients in group A and 26 (8.4%) patients in group B were classified as not requiring HES appointment. These control groups indicate that approximately 10-15% of paper referrals are not seen in the HES. To summarise, therefore, 63% of people referred by the optometrist directly using electronic referral (with or without images) were given a HES appointment compared to 85% of people referred through the traditional paper method (without images) through their GP.
CONCLUSION: Electronic referral with images to the HES is safe, speedy, efficient, and clinically accurate given some limitations and avoids unnecessary consultation in 37% of referrals.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18600247     DOI: 10.1038/eye.2008.196

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eye (Lond)        ISSN: 0950-222X            Impact factor:   3.775


  16 in total

1.  Using electronic referral with digital imaging between primary and secondary ophthalmic services: a long term prospective analysis of regional service redesign.

Authors:  S Borooah; B Grant; A Blaikie; C Styles; S Sutherland; G Forrest; P Curry; J Legg; A Walker; R Sanders
Journal:  Eye (Lond)       Date:  2012-12-21       Impact factor: 3.775

2.  Improving the effectiveness of electronic health record-based referral processes.

Authors:  Adol Esquivel; Dean F Sittig; Daniel R Murphy; Hardeep Singh
Journal:  BMC Med Inform Decis Mak       Date:  2012-09-13       Impact factor: 2.796

3.  Quality of optometry referrals to neovascular age-related macular degeneration clinic: a prospective study.

Authors:  Wisam J Muen; Simon A Hewick
Journal:  JRSM Short Rep       Date:  2011-08-01

4.  Teleophthalmology with optical coherence tomography imaging in community optometry. Evaluation of a quality improvement for macular patients.

Authors:  Simon P Kelly; Ian Wallwork; David Haider; Kashif Qureshi
Journal:  Clin Ophthalmol       Date:  2011-12-01

Review 5.  Action on AMD. Optimising patient management: act now to ensure current and continual delivery of best possible patient care.

Authors:  W Amoaku; S Blakeney; M Freeman; R Gale; R Johnston; S P Kelly; B McLaughlan; D Sahu; D Varma
Journal:  Eye (Lond)       Date:  2012-02       Impact factor: 3.775

6.  Effectiveness of Community versus Hospital Eye Service follow-up for patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration with quiescent disease (ECHoES): a virtual non-inferiority trial.

Authors:  Barnaby C Reeves; Lauren J Scott; Jodi Taylor; Simon P Harding; Tunde Peto; Alyson Muldrew; Ruth E Hogg; Sarah Wordsworth; Nicola Mills; Dermot O'Reilly; Chris A Rogers; Usha Chakravarthy
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2016-07-08       Impact factor: 2.692

7.  Collaborative care of non-urgent macular disease: a study of inter-optometric referrals.

Authors:  Angelica Ly; Lisa Nivison-Smith; Michael P Hennessy; Michael Kalloniatis
Journal:  Ophthalmic Physiol Opt       Date:  2016-11       Impact factor: 3.117

8.  Investigation of time to first presentation and extrahospital factors in the treatment of neovascular age-related macular degeneration: a retrospective cross-sectional study.

Authors:  Peng Yong Sim; Sonul Gajree; Baljean Dhillon; Shyamanga Borooah
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2017-12-10       Impact factor: 2.692

Review 9.  The Evolution of Teleophthalmology Programs in the United Kingdom: Beyond Diabetic Retinopathy Screening.

Authors:  Dawn A Sim; Danny Mitry; Philip Alexander; Adam Mapani; Srini Goverdhan; Tariq Aslam; Adnan Tufail; Catherine A Egan; Pearse A Keane
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2016-02-01

10.  The design and implementation of a study to investigate the effectiveness of community vs hospital eye service follow-up for patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration with quiescent disease.

Authors:  J Taylor; L J Scott; C A Rogers; A Muldrew; D O'Reilly; S Wordsworth; N Mills; R Hogg; M Violato; S P Harding; T Peto; D Townsend; U Chakravarthy; B C Reeves
Journal:  Eye (Lond)       Date:  2015-10-09       Impact factor: 3.775

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.