Judith E Goldstein1, Xinxing Guo1, Michael V Boland1,2, Bonnielin K Swenor1,3. 1. Wilmer Eye Institute, Johns Hopkins University , Baltimore, Maryland, USA. 2. Division of Health Sciences Informatics, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine , Baltimore, Maryland, USA. 3. Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University , Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To estimate the number of patients accessing eye care with low vision (LV) at a large multi-site ophthalmology institute who utilize low vision rehabilitation (LVR) services and compare their characteristics to individuals who do not utilize LVR services. METHODS: This is an electronic health record-based retrospective chart analysis. Patients with LV were identified as having at least one encounter in 2014 where the best visual acuity (VA) in the better-seeing eye was worse than 20/40. Utilization of LVR services across 9 clinic locations was evaluated. Logistic regression analyses were used to examine patient characteristics associated with service utilization. RESULTS: Of the 7,752 LV patients, 1,585 (20%) utilized LVR services over the 17-month period. Those utilizing LVR were more likely to have VA between 20/60 and 20/200 or between 20/200 and 20/500 than non-users (P < .001). The highest LVR utilization rates were in patients evaluated in retina (23%), glaucoma (22%), and neuro-ophthalmology (18%) subspecialties. Patients seen at clinic locations with onsite LVR services available were more likely to utilize services (odds ratio [OR] ranged from 2.69 [95% confidence interval, 95% CI: 1.63-4.44] to 4.94 [95% CI: 2.12-11.48] across location categories), as were patients who had evidence of fluctuations in VA measurements (OR = 3.33, 95% CI: 2.89-3.84). CONCLUSIONS: Patients are more likely to utilize services when VA is moderately to severely impaired, VA fluctuations are present, or when LVR services are provided at the same location where other ophthalmic services are obtained. These estimates are important for developing interventions aimed at improving LVR utilization.
PURPOSE: To estimate the number of patients accessing eye care with low vision (LV) at a large multi-site ophthalmology institute who utilize low vision rehabilitation (LVR) services and compare their characteristics to individuals who do not utilize LVR services. METHODS: This is an electronic health record-based retrospective chart analysis. Patients with LV were identified as having at least one encounter in 2014 where the best visual acuity (VA) in the better-seeing eye was worse than 20/40. Utilization of LVR services across 9 clinic locations was evaluated. Logistic regression analyses were used to examine patient characteristics associated with service utilization. RESULTS: Of the 7,752 LVpatients, 1,585 (20%) utilized LVR services over the 17-month period. Those utilizing LVR were more likely to have VA between 20/60 and 20/200 or between 20/200 and 20/500 than non-users (P < .001). The highest LVR utilization rates were in patients evaluated in retina (23%), glaucoma (22%), and neuro-ophthalmology (18%) subspecialties. Patients seen at clinic locations with onsite LVR services available were more likely to utilize services (odds ratio [OR] ranged from 2.69 [95% confidence interval, 95% CI: 1.63-4.44] to 4.94 [95% CI: 2.12-11.48] across location categories), as were patients who had evidence of fluctuations in VA measurements (OR = 3.33, 95% CI: 2.89-3.84). CONCLUSIONS:Patients are more likely to utilize services when VA is moderately to severely impaired, VA fluctuations are present, or when LVR services are provided at the same location where other ophthalmic services are obtained. These estimates are important for developing interventions aimed at improving LVR utilization.
Authors: Xinxing Guo; Bonnielin K Swenor; Kerry Smith; Michael V Boland; Judith E Goldstein Journal: Transl Vis Sci Technol Date: 2021-03-01 Impact factor: 3.283
Authors: Miriam L Stolwijk; Ruth M A van Nispen; Ilona W M Verburg; Lieke van Gerwen; Tim van de Brug; Ger H M B van Rens Journal: Ophthalmic Physiol Opt Date: 2022-04-04 Impact factor: 3.992
Authors: Judith E Goldstein; Xinxing Guo; Bonnielin K Swenor; Michael V Boland; Kerry Smith Journal: Transl Vis Sci Technol Date: 2022-10-03 Impact factor: 3.048