Objectives To assess and describe current utilisation, characteristics and perspectives on virtual glaucoma clinics (VGCs) amongst European glaucoma specialists. Methods Cross-sectional, anonymized, online questionnaire distributed to all European Glaucoma Society-registered specialists. Questions were stratified into five domains: Demographics, Questions about VGC use, Questions for non-VGC users, COVID-19 effects, and VGC advantages/disadvantages. Results 30% of 169 participants currently use VGCs, with 53% based in the United Kingdom. Of those using VGCs, 85% reported higher patient acceptance compared to traditional care. The commonest virtual model was asynchronous remote monitoring (54%). Nurses (49%) and ophthalmic technicians (46%) were mostly responsible for data collection, with two-thirds using a mixture of professionals. Consultant ophthalmologists were the main decision-makers in 51% of VGCs. Preferred cohorts were: ocular hypertension (85%), glaucoma suspects (80%), early/moderate glaucoma in worse eye (68%), stable glaucoma irrespective of treatment (59%) and stable glaucoma on monotherapy (51%). Commonest investigations were: IOP (90%), BCVA (88%), visual field testing (85%) and OCT (78%), with 33 different combinations. Reasons for face-to-face referral included: visual field progression (80%), 'above-target' IOP (63%), and OCT progression (51%). Reasons for not using VGCs included: lack of experience (47%), adequate systems in place (42%), no appropriate staff (34%) and insufficient time/money (34%). 55% of non-VGC users are interested in their use with 38% currently considering future implementation. 83% stated VGC consultations have increased during the COVID-19 pandemic; 86% of all participants felt that the pandemic has highlighted the importance of VGCs. Conclusions A significant proportion of European glaucoma units are currently using VGCs, while others are considering implementation. Financial reimbursement and consensus guidelines are potentially crucial steps in VGC uptake.
The current use of glaucoma virtual clinics in Europe
Fea, Antonio Maria;
2023-01-01
Abstract
Objectives To assess and describe current utilisation, characteristics and perspectives on virtual glaucoma clinics (VGCs) amongst European glaucoma specialists. Methods Cross-sectional, anonymized, online questionnaire distributed to all European Glaucoma Society-registered specialists. Questions were stratified into five domains: Demographics, Questions about VGC use, Questions for non-VGC users, COVID-19 effects, and VGC advantages/disadvantages. Results 30% of 169 participants currently use VGCs, with 53% based in the United Kingdom. Of those using VGCs, 85% reported higher patient acceptance compared to traditional care. The commonest virtual model was asynchronous remote monitoring (54%). Nurses (49%) and ophthalmic technicians (46%) were mostly responsible for data collection, with two-thirds using a mixture of professionals. Consultant ophthalmologists were the main decision-makers in 51% of VGCs. Preferred cohorts were: ocular hypertension (85%), glaucoma suspects (80%), early/moderate glaucoma in worse eye (68%), stable glaucoma irrespective of treatment (59%) and stable glaucoma on monotherapy (51%). Commonest investigations were: IOP (90%), BCVA (88%), visual field testing (85%) and OCT (78%), with 33 different combinations. Reasons for face-to-face referral included: visual field progression (80%), 'above-target' IOP (63%), and OCT progression (51%). Reasons for not using VGCs included: lack of experience (47%), adequate systems in place (42%), no appropriate staff (34%) and insufficient time/money (34%). 55% of non-VGC users are interested in their use with 38% currently considering future implementation. 83% stated VGC consultations have increased during the COVID-19 pandemic; 86% of all participants felt that the pandemic has highlighted the importance of VGCs. Conclusions A significant proportion of European glaucoma units are currently using VGCs, while others are considering implementation. Financial reimbursement and consensus guidelines are potentially crucial steps in VGC uptake.
| File | Dimensione | Formato | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
s41433-022-02111-5.pdf
Accesso aperto
Tipo di file:
PDF EDITORIALE
Dimensione
965.47 kB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
965.47 kB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri |
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
