作为改善视力健康模式的联邦合格医疗中心:系统回顾。

IF 7.8 1区 医学 Q1 OPHTHALMOLOGY
Patricia Bai, Spencer S Burt, Maria A Woodward, Scott Haber, Paula Anne Newman-Casey, Jeffrey D Henderer, R V Paul Chan, Aiyin Chen
{"title":"作为改善视力健康模式的联邦合格医疗中心:系统回顾。","authors":"Patricia Bai, Spencer S Burt, Maria A Woodward, Scott Haber, Paula Anne Newman-Casey, Jeffrey D Henderer, R V Paul Chan, Aiyin Chen","doi":"10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2024.6264","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Importance: </strong>Disparities in eye health are associated with lower-income and minoritized populations, many of whom seek care at federally qualified health centers (FQHCs).</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To examine the literature addressing vision and eye health care provided at FQHCs, identify barriers to providing care at FQHCs, and highlight recommendations on how FQHCs can decrease disparities in eye health.</p><p><strong>Evidence review: </strong>A systematic review of Embase, SCOPUS, and PubMed was performed, and articles regarding eye and vision health at FQHCs within the US published between January 1, 1965, and July 14, 2023, were included. This review was conducted using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Structured data and case studies were extracted and collated using an a priori method to reduce bias.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>The systematic review yielded 423 unique articles, with 43 meeting inclusion criteria. Only 18.3% to 29% of FQHCs reported on-site vision services with the remainder relying on external referrals to vision specialists. Primary eye conditions evaluated included diabetic retinopathy (26 studies), general eye health (11 studies), and glaucoma (6 studies). Telehealth vision initiatives were an important method to expand access (18 studies). Other topics included economic analysis (5 studies) and policy suggestions (3 studies) to increase vision services at FQHCs. Systemic barriers to accessing care at FQHCs were the lack of eye clinicians available to provide services, the cost of resources, and limited reimbursement to implement screening programs. Patient barriers to accessing care included financial constraints for specialist care, limited awareness of the importance of eye examinations, and difficulty navigating the insurance system.</p><p><strong>Conclusions and relevance: </strong>Findings of this systematic review suggest that FQHCs are well positioned to increase vision services and thus improve vision health equity, serving populations who are at a higher risk for vision disorders. Results find systemic and patient-level barriers to vision health that may need to be addressed. Policy leaders could leverage existing gaps for purposeful advocacy, set standards and metrics for vision health at FQHCs, promote novel models of care, and encourage collaboration of eye clinicians with partnering FQHCs.</p>","PeriodicalId":14518,"journal":{"name":"JAMA ophthalmology","volume":" ","pages":"242-251"},"PeriodicalIF":7.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Federally Qualified Health Centers as a Model to Improve Vision Health: A Systematic Review.\",\"authors\":\"Patricia Bai, Spencer S Burt, Maria A Woodward, Scott Haber, Paula Anne Newman-Casey, Jeffrey D Henderer, R V Paul Chan, Aiyin Chen\",\"doi\":\"10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2024.6264\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Importance: </strong>Disparities in eye health are associated with lower-income and minoritized populations, many of whom seek care at federally qualified health centers (FQHCs).</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To examine the literature addressing vision and eye health care provided at FQHCs, identify barriers to providing care at FQHCs, and highlight recommendations on how FQHCs can decrease disparities in eye health.</p><p><strong>Evidence review: </strong>A systematic review of Embase, SCOPUS, and PubMed was performed, and articles regarding eye and vision health at FQHCs within the US published between January 1, 1965, and July 14, 2023, were included. This review was conducted using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Structured data and case studies were extracted and collated using an a priori method to reduce bias.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>The systematic review yielded 423 unique articles, with 43 meeting inclusion criteria. Only 18.3% to 29% of FQHCs reported on-site vision services with the remainder relying on external referrals to vision specialists. Primary eye conditions evaluated included diabetic retinopathy (26 studies), general eye health (11 studies), and glaucoma (6 studies). Telehealth vision initiatives were an important method to expand access (18 studies). Other topics included economic analysis (5 studies) and policy suggestions (3 studies) to increase vision services at FQHCs. Systemic barriers to accessing care at FQHCs were the lack of eye clinicians available to provide services, the cost of resources, and limited reimbursement to implement screening programs. Patient barriers to accessing care included financial constraints for specialist care, limited awareness of the importance of eye examinations, and difficulty navigating the insurance system.</p><p><strong>Conclusions and relevance: </strong>Findings of this systematic review suggest that FQHCs are well positioned to increase vision services and thus improve vision health equity, serving populations who are at a higher risk for vision disorders. Results find systemic and patient-level barriers to vision health that may need to be addressed. Policy leaders could leverage existing gaps for purposeful advocacy, set standards and metrics for vision health at FQHCs, promote novel models of care, and encourage collaboration of eye clinicians with partnering FQHCs.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14518,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"JAMA ophthalmology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"242-251\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":7.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"JAMA ophthalmology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2024.6264\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"OPHTHALMOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JAMA ophthalmology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2024.6264","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

重要性:眼睛健康的差异与低收入和少数民族人群有关,他们中的许多人在联邦合格的健康中心(FQHCs)寻求护理。目的:回顾有关家庭健康中心提供视力和眼睛保健的文献,确定家庭健康中心提供保健的障碍,并重点介绍家庭健康中心如何减少眼睛健康差异的建议。证据回顾:对Embase、SCOPUS和PubMed进行了系统回顾,纳入了1965年1月1日至2023年7月14日期间发表的有关美国fqhc眼睛和视力健康的文章。本综述采用系统评价和荟萃分析指南的首选报告项目进行。使用先验方法提取和整理结构化数据和案例研究,以减少偏差。结果:系统综述共产生423篇独特的文章,其中43篇符合纳入标准。只有18.3%到29%的fqhc报告了现场视力服务,其余的依靠外部推荐给视力专家。评估的主要眼部疾病包括糖尿病视网膜病变(26项研究)、一般眼部健康(11项研究)和青光眼(6项研究)。远程保健视力倡议是扩大可及性的重要方法(18项研究)。其他课题包括经济分析(5项研究)和政策建议(3项研究),以增加fqhc的视力服务。在fqhc获得护理的系统性障碍是缺乏可用的眼科医生提供服务、资源成本和实施筛查计划的有限报销。患者获得护理的障碍包括专科护理的财政限制,对眼科检查重要性的认识有限,以及难以驾驭保险系统。结论和相关性:本系统综述的结果表明,fqhc可以很好地增加视力服务,从而改善视力健康公平性,为视力障碍风险较高的人群服务。结果发现可能需要解决的系统性和患者层面的视力健康障碍。政策领导人可以利用现有的差距进行有目的的宣传,为fqhc的视力健康制定标准和指标,推广新的护理模式,并鼓励眼科医生与合作的fqhc进行合作。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Federally Qualified Health Centers as a Model to Improve Vision Health: A Systematic Review.

Importance: Disparities in eye health are associated with lower-income and minoritized populations, many of whom seek care at federally qualified health centers (FQHCs).

Objective: To examine the literature addressing vision and eye health care provided at FQHCs, identify barriers to providing care at FQHCs, and highlight recommendations on how FQHCs can decrease disparities in eye health.

Evidence review: A systematic review of Embase, SCOPUS, and PubMed was performed, and articles regarding eye and vision health at FQHCs within the US published between January 1, 1965, and July 14, 2023, were included. This review was conducted using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Structured data and case studies were extracted and collated using an a priori method to reduce bias.

Findings: The systematic review yielded 423 unique articles, with 43 meeting inclusion criteria. Only 18.3% to 29% of FQHCs reported on-site vision services with the remainder relying on external referrals to vision specialists. Primary eye conditions evaluated included diabetic retinopathy (26 studies), general eye health (11 studies), and glaucoma (6 studies). Telehealth vision initiatives were an important method to expand access (18 studies). Other topics included economic analysis (5 studies) and policy suggestions (3 studies) to increase vision services at FQHCs. Systemic barriers to accessing care at FQHCs were the lack of eye clinicians available to provide services, the cost of resources, and limited reimbursement to implement screening programs. Patient barriers to accessing care included financial constraints for specialist care, limited awareness of the importance of eye examinations, and difficulty navigating the insurance system.

Conclusions and relevance: Findings of this systematic review suggest that FQHCs are well positioned to increase vision services and thus improve vision health equity, serving populations who are at a higher risk for vision disorders. Results find systemic and patient-level barriers to vision health that may need to be addressed. Policy leaders could leverage existing gaps for purposeful advocacy, set standards and metrics for vision health at FQHCs, promote novel models of care, and encourage collaboration of eye clinicians with partnering FQHCs.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
JAMA ophthalmology
JAMA ophthalmology OPHTHALMOLOGY-
CiteScore
13.20
自引率
3.70%
发文量
340
期刊介绍: JAMA Ophthalmology, with a rich history of continuous publication since 1869, stands as a distinguished international, peer-reviewed journal dedicated to ophthalmology and visual science. In 2019, the journal proudly commemorated 150 years of uninterrupted service to the field. As a member of the esteemed JAMA Network, a consortium renowned for its peer-reviewed general medical and specialty publications, JAMA Ophthalmology upholds the highest standards of excellence in disseminating cutting-edge research and insights. Join us in celebrating our legacy and advancing the frontiers of ophthalmology and visual science.
×
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