Michael Waisbourd1, Noelle L Pruzan2, Deiana Johnson2, Angela Ugorets2, John E Crews3, Jinan B Saaddine3, Jeffery D Henderer4, Lisa A Hark2, L Jay Katz2. 1. Wills Eye Hospital Glaucoma Research Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Electronic address: MWaisbourd@willseye.org. 2. Wills Eye Hospital Glaucoma Research Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. 3. Vision Health Initiative, Division of Diabetes Translation, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia. 4. Lewis Katz School of Medicine at Temple University, Department of Ophthalmology, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate the detection rates of glaucoma-related diagnoses and the initial treatments received in the Philadelphia Glaucoma Detection and Treatment Project, a community-based initiative aimed at improving the detection, treatment, and follow-up care of individuals at risk for glaucoma. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 1649 individuals at risk for glaucoma who were examined and treated in 43 community centers located in underserved communities of Philadelphia. METHODS: Individuals were enrolled if they were African American aged ≥50 years, were any other adult aged ≥60 years, or had a family history of glaucoma. After attending an informational glaucoma workshop, participants underwent a targeted glaucoma examination including an ocular, medical, and family history; visual acuity testing, intraocular pressure (IOP) measurement, and corneal pachymetry; slit-lamp and optic nerve examination; automated visual field testing; and fundus color photography. If indicated, treatments included selective laser trabeculoplasty (SLT), laser peripheral iridotomy (LPI), or IOP-lowering medications. Follow-up examinations were scheduled at the community sites after 4 to 6 weeks or 4 to 6 months, depending on the clinical scenario. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Detection rates of glaucoma-related diagnoses and types of treatments administered. RESULTS: Of the 1649 individuals enrolled, 645 (39.1%) received a glaucoma-related diagnosis; 20.0% (n = 330) were identified as open-angle glaucoma (OAG) suspects, 9.2% (n = 151) were identified as having narrow angles (or as a primary angle closure/suspect), and 10.0% (n = 164) were diagnosed with glaucoma, including 9.0% (n = 148) with OAG and 1.0% (n = 16) with angle-closure glaucoma. Overall, 39.0% (n = 64 of 164) of those diagnosed with glaucoma were unaware of their diagnosis. A total of 196 patients (11.9%) received glaucoma-related treatment, including 84 (5.1%) who underwent LPI, 13 (0.8%) who underwent SLT, and 103 (6.2%) who were prescribed IOP-lowering medication. CONCLUSIONS: Targeting individuals at risk for glaucoma in underserved communities in Philadelphia yielded a high detection rate (39.1%) of glaucoma-related diagnoses. Providing examinations and offering treatment, including first-line laser procedures, at community-based sites providing services to older adults are effective to improve access to eye care by underserved populations.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the detection rates of glaucoma-related diagnoses and the initial treatments received in the Philadelphia Glaucoma Detection and Treatment Project, a community-based initiative aimed at improving the detection, treatment, and follow-up care of individuals at risk for glaucoma. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 1649 individuals at risk for glaucoma who were examined and treated in 43 community centers located in underserved communities of Philadelphia. METHODS: Individuals were enrolled if they were African American aged ≥50 years, were any other adult aged ≥60 years, or had a family history of glaucoma. After attending an informational glaucoma workshop, participants underwent a targeted glaucoma examination including an ocular, medical, and family history; visual acuity testing, intraocular pressure (IOP) measurement, and corneal pachymetry; slit-lamp and optic nerve examination; automated visual field testing; and fundus color photography. If indicated, treatments included selective laser trabeculoplasty (SLT), laser peripheral iridotomy (LPI), or IOP-lowering medications. Follow-up examinations were scheduled at the community sites after 4 to 6 weeks or 4 to 6 months, depending on the clinical scenario. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Detection rates of glaucoma-related diagnoses and types of treatments administered. RESULTS: Of the 1649 individuals enrolled, 645 (39.1%) received a glaucoma-related diagnosis; 20.0% (n = 330) were identified as open-angle glaucoma (OAG) suspects, 9.2% (n = 151) were identified as having narrow angles (or as a primary angle closure/suspect), and 10.0% (n = 164) were diagnosed with glaucoma, including 9.0% (n = 148) with OAG and 1.0% (n = 16) with angle-closure glaucoma. Overall, 39.0% (n = 64 of 164) of those diagnosed with glaucoma were unaware of their diagnosis. A total of 196 patients (11.9%) received glaucoma-related treatment, including 84 (5.1%) who underwent LPI, 13 (0.8%) who underwent SLT, and 103 (6.2%) who were prescribed IOP-lowering medication. CONCLUSIONS: Targeting individuals at risk for glaucoma in underserved communities in Philadelphia yielded a high detection rate (39.1%) of glaucoma-related diagnoses. Providing examinations and offering treatment, including first-line laser procedures, at community-based sites providing services to older adults are effective to improve access to eye care by underserved populations.
Authors: Alexander C Day; Gianluca Baio; Gus Gazzard; Catey Bunce; Augusto Azuara-Blanco; Beatriz Munoz; David S Friedman; Paul J Foster Journal: Br J Ophthalmol Date: 2012-05-31 Impact factor: 4.638
Authors: Robert S Feder; Timothy W Olsen; Bruce E Prum; C Gail Summers; Randall J Olson; Ruth D Williams; David C Musch Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 2015-11-12 Impact factor: 12.079
Authors: Michael Waisbourd; Emily A Bond; Timothy Sullivan; Wanda D Hu; Sonya B Shah; Jeanne Molineaux; Harjeet Sembhi; George L Spaeth; Jonathan S Myers; Lisa A Hark; L Jay Katz Journal: J Glaucoma Date: 2016-05 Impact factor: 2.503
Authors: Sarah E Miller; Suman Thapa; Alan L Robin; Leslie M Niziol; Pradeep Y Ramulu; Maria A Woodward; Indira Paudyal; Ian Pitha; Tyson N Kim; Paula Anne Newman-Casey Journal: Am J Ophthalmol Date: 2017-07-19 Impact factor: 5.258
Authors: Kenman Gan; Yao Liu; Brian Stagg; Siddarth Rathi; Louis R Pasquale; Karim Damji Journal: Telemed J E Health Date: 2020-03-25 Impact factor: 3.536
Authors: Mark B Horton; Christopher J Brady; Jerry Cavallerano; Michael Abramoff; Gail Barker; Michael F Chiang; Charlene H Crockett; Seema Garg; Peter Karth; Yao Liu; Clark D Newman; Siddarth Rathi; Veeral Sheth; Paolo Silva; Kristen Stebbins; Ingrid Zimmer-Galler Journal: Telemed J E Health Date: 2020-03-25 Impact factor: 3.536
Authors: Shuai-Chun Lin; Cindy X Zheng; Michael Waisbourd; Jeanne Molineaux; Lichuan Zeng; Tingting Zhan; Kamran Rahmatnejad; Arthur Resende; Anand V Mantravadi; Lisa A Hark; Marlene R Moster; Joseph I Markoff; George L Spaeth; L Jay Katz Journal: J Ophthalmic Vis Res Date: 2018 Jul-Sep
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
Authors: David W Collins; Harini V Gudiseva; Venkata R M Chavali; Benjamin Trachtman; Meera Ramakrishnan; William T Merritt; Maxwell Pistilli; Rebecca A Rossi; Stephanie Blachon; Prithvi S Sankar; Eydie Miller-Ellis; Amanda Lehman; Victoria Addis; Joan M O'Brien Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2018-04-01 Impact factor: 4.799