Feasibility, safety and clinical efficiency of optometric service pathways at primary and tertiary care level in Ampang, Malaysia

Q4 Medicine
D. A. Hussin, P. Hendicott, Andrew Carkeet, P. Baker, Ai-Hong Chen, Zalifa Zakiah Asnir, Zaira Zuraina Zainal Abidin, Rusnah B T Hussain, Azlina Mokhtar
{"title":"Feasibility, safety and clinical efficiency of optometric service pathways at primary and tertiary care level in Ampang, Malaysia","authors":"D. A. Hussin, P. Hendicott, Andrew Carkeet, P. Baker, Ai-Hong Chen, Zalifa Zakiah Asnir, Zaira Zuraina Zainal Abidin, Rusnah B T Hussain, Azlina Mokhtar","doi":"10.35119/asjoo.v16i3.512","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Aim: To evaluate feasibility, safety, and clinical efficiency of optometrists in conducting diabetic retinopathy screening and ocular health screening. \nMethods: This was a prospective observational trial study of newly developed optometric service pathways established at a community health clinic for diabetic retinopathy screening and a hospital ophthalmology clinic for ocular health screening. The study was carried out to assess the feasibility and safety of eye examinations conducted by optometrists. Patients were examined by optometrists using a standard eye examination at both clinics and re-examined by ophthalmologists as the reference standard. Optometrists recorded diagnoses of ocular conditions and classified referral urgency for each patient and these were compared with the diagnoses made by ophthalmologists, who were masked to the optometrists’ findings. \nResults: There was a high concordance of 87.0% (95% CI 80.4%-93.6%) for the diagnoses between the optometrists and ophthalmologists. Of 26 patients considered by the optometrists to need ophthalmology referral, 23 were agreed as such by the ophthalmologists, giving good agreement, κ = 0.76 (95% CI 0.53 -0.94) between the optometrists and ophthalmologists on referral classification. Agreement by the ophthalmologists for referral urgency classifications (very urgent/urgent or non-urgent) was very good (κ = 0.85, 95%CI 0.62-1.00). \nConclusions: Ocular health examination by optometrists using optometric-eyecare pathways is feasible and safe. Optometrists showed strong agreement with  ophthalmologists when diagnosing patients who had a range of ocular conditions. Optometrists were also able to triage referrals and their urgency accurately, suggesting that they could play an extensive role as primary eye care providers, thus reducing unnecessary referrals to ophthalmology clinics.","PeriodicalId":39864,"journal":{"name":"Asian Journal of Ophthalmology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asian Journal of Ophthalmology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.35119/asjoo.v16i3.512","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aim: To evaluate feasibility, safety, and clinical efficiency of optometrists in conducting diabetic retinopathy screening and ocular health screening. Methods: This was a prospective observational trial study of newly developed optometric service pathways established at a community health clinic for diabetic retinopathy screening and a hospital ophthalmology clinic for ocular health screening. The study was carried out to assess the feasibility and safety of eye examinations conducted by optometrists. Patients were examined by optometrists using a standard eye examination at both clinics and re-examined by ophthalmologists as the reference standard. Optometrists recorded diagnoses of ocular conditions and classified referral urgency for each patient and these were compared with the diagnoses made by ophthalmologists, who were masked to the optometrists’ findings. Results: There was a high concordance of 87.0% (95% CI 80.4%-93.6%) for the diagnoses between the optometrists and ophthalmologists. Of 26 patients considered by the optometrists to need ophthalmology referral, 23 were agreed as such by the ophthalmologists, giving good agreement, κ = 0.76 (95% CI 0.53 -0.94) between the optometrists and ophthalmologists on referral classification. Agreement by the ophthalmologists for referral urgency classifications (very urgent/urgent or non-urgent) was very good (κ = 0.85, 95%CI 0.62-1.00). Conclusions: Ocular health examination by optometrists using optometric-eyecare pathways is feasible and safe. Optometrists showed strong agreement with  ophthalmologists when diagnosing patients who had a range of ocular conditions. Optometrists were also able to triage referrals and their urgency accurately, suggesting that they could play an extensive role as primary eye care providers, thus reducing unnecessary referrals to ophthalmology clinics.
马来西亚安邦初级和三级保健水平验光服务途径的可行性、安全性和临床效率
目的:评价验光师进行糖尿病视网膜病变筛查和眼部健康筛查的可行性、安全性和临床效率。方法:这是一项前瞻性观察性试验研究,研究了在社区健康诊所建立的糖尿病视网膜病变筛查验光服务途径和在医院眼科诊所建立的眼科健康筛查验光服务渠道。这项研究是为了评估验光师进行眼科检查的可行性和安全性。患者由验光师在两个诊所使用标准眼科检查进行检查,并由眼科医生重新检查作为参考标准。验光师记录了每个患者的眼部疾病诊断和分类转诊紧急程度,并将其与眼科医生的诊断进行比较,眼科医生对验光师的发现视而不见。结果:验光师与眼科医生的诊断符合率高达87.0%(95%CI 80.4%-93.6%)。在验光师认为需要眼科转诊的26名患者中,23名患者得到了眼科医生的同意,验光师和眼科医生在转诊分类上达成了良好的一致意见,κ=0.76(95%CI 0.53-0.94)。眼科医生对转诊紧急程度分类(非常紧急/紧急或非紧急)的一致性非常好(κ=0.85,95%CI 0.62-1.00)。结论:验光师使用验光眼部护理途径进行眼部健康检查是可行和安全的。验光师在诊断患有各种眼部疾病的患者时,与眼科医生表现出了强烈的一致性。验光师还能够准确地对转诊情况及其紧迫性进行分类,这表明他们可以作为初级眼科护理提供者发挥广泛作用,从而减少不必要的眼科诊所转诊。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Asian Journal of Ophthalmology
Asian Journal of Ophthalmology Medicine-Ophthalmology
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Asian Journal of OPHTHALMOLOGY is the official peer-reviewed journal of the South East Asia Glaucoma Interest Group (SEAGIG) and is indexed in EMBASE/Excerpta Medica. Asian Journal of OPHTHALMOLOGY is published quarterly (four [4] issues per year) by Scientific Communications International Limited. The journal is published on-line only and is distributed free of cost via the SEAGIG website.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信