AIMS: The Community and Hospital Allied Network Glaucoma Evaluation Scheme (CHANGES) used accredited community-based optometrists with a special interest (OSIs) in glaucoma to monitor ocular hypertensive (OHT) patients under virtual supervision of the Hospital Glaucoma Service (HGS). The purpose of this paper was to report the outcomes of the first completed community-based visit. METHODS: Eligible patients underwent a glaucoma consultant-led clinical examination before transfer to CHANGES. Individualised intraocular pressure (IOP) and follow-up time interval targets were set for each patient. OSIs used applanation tonometry, slit-lamp biomicroscopy, automated visual field testing and digital optic disc photography. The hospital-based glaucoma team evaluated the data virtually. Patients were referred back to the HGS according to specific criteria. RESULTS: One hundred and sixty eight OHT patients were invited to attend their first OSI appointment. Of these, 144 attended their appointment (attendance rate 85.7%). Outcomes of 130 patients with complete data sets are reported. Sixteen patients (12.3%) were referred back to the HGS due to IOP above target, new visual field defects and/or optic nerve changes. The glaucoma consultant retained eight patients (6.1%) within the HGS on the basis of definite or probable glaucomatous conversion. CONCLUSIONS: CHANGES freed up capacity within a busy HGS. However, improvements need to be made regarding non-attendance rates in the community. The relatively high one-year definite or probable conversion rate emphasises the importance of the comprehensive review of OHT patients and of hospital-led virtual supervision to maintain patient safety.
AIMS: The Community and Hospital Allied Network Glaucoma Evaluation Scheme (CHANGES) used accredited community-based optometrists with a special interest (OSIs) in glaucoma to monitor ocular hypertensive (OHT) patients under virtual supervision of the Hospital Glaucoma Service (HGS). The purpose of this paper was to report the outcomes of the first completed community-based visit. METHODS: Eligible patients underwent a glaucoma consultant-led clinical examination before transfer to CHANGES. Individualised intraocular pressure (IOP) and follow-up time interval targets were set for each patient. OSIs used applanation tonometry, slit-lamp biomicroscopy, automated visual field testing and digital optic disc photography. The hospital-based glaucoma team evaluated the data virtually. Patients were referred back to the HGS according to specific criteria. RESULTS: One hundred and sixty eight OHT patients were invited to attend their first OSI appointment. Of these, 144 attended their appointment (attendance rate 85.7%). Outcomes of 130 patients with complete data sets are reported. Sixteen patients (12.3%) were referred back to the HGS due to IOP above target, new visual field defects and/or optic nerve changes. The glaucoma consultant retained eight patients (6.1%) within the HGS on the basis of definite or probable glaucomatous conversion. CONCLUSIONS: CHANGES freed up capacity within a busy HGS. However, improvements need to be made regarding non-attendance rates in the community. The relatively high one-year definite or probable conversion rate emphasises the importance of the comprehensive review of OHT patients and of hospital-led virtual supervision to maintain patient safety.
Authors: P J Foster; J G Devereux; P H Alsbirk; P S Lee; D Uranchimeg; D Machin; G J Johnson; J Baasanhu Journal: Br J Ophthalmol Date: 2000-02 Impact factor: 4.638
Authors: P G Spry; I C Spencer; J M Sparrow; T J Peters; S T Brookes; S Gray; I Baker; J E Furber; D L Easty Journal: Br J Ophthalmol Date: 1999-06 Impact factor: 4.638
Authors: Michael A Kass; Dale K Heuer; Eve J Higginbotham; Chris A Johnson; John L Keltner; J Philip Miller; Richard K Parrish; M Roy Wilson; Mae O Gordon Journal: Arch Ophthalmol Date: 2002-06
Authors: Angelica Ly; Elizabeth Wong; Jessie Huang; Michael Yapp; Katherine Masselos; Michael Hennessy; Michael Kalloniatis; Barbara Zangerl Journal: Int J Integr Care Date: 2020-08-07 Impact factor: 5.120
Authors: Tasneem Z Khatib; Keith R Martin; Yusuf Mushtaq; Binita Panchasara; Nikou Nassehzadehtabriz; Hong Kai Lim; Maryam Mushtaq; Jane Kean; Sarah Farrell; Rupert R A Bourne; Humma Shahid Journal: Eye (Lond) Date: 2021-03-21 Impact factor: 3.775
Authors: Lisa A Hark; Deiana M Johnson; Giuliana Berardi; Neal S Patel; Lichuan Zeng; Yang Dai; Eileen L Mayro; Michael Waisbourd; L Jay Katz Journal: Patient Prefer Adherence Date: 2016-09-08 Impact factor: 2.711