Search

Background: This systematic review of teleophthalmology services in Australia, the United States of America (USA), Canada, and the United Kingdom (UK) during the COVID-19 pandemic is aimed to evaluate changes in teleophthalmology, comparing them to New Zealand (NZ). Methods:A literature search of electronic databases Scopus, Proquest, PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, and Google was conducted using search terms: telemedicine, ophthalmology, teleophthalmology/teleophthalmology, and COVID/COVID-19/coronavirus/covid-pandemic. Studies describing teleophthalmology services created in response to COVID-19 restrictions from March 1, 2020, to January 31, 2024, were analyzed. Results: Of the articles, 37 describing 29 discrete teleophthalmology services were included. There were 15 services in the USA, seven in the UK, two in Canada, two in Australia, and three in NZ. The models of care in the USA were well described, and teleophthalmology was used for general, external, anterior segment, neuro-ophthalmology, and oculoplastic consults, as well as for grading of fundus images in the emergency department setting. In the UK, teleophthalmology was used for general eye care, oculoplastics, and pediatric ophthalmology. In Australia, teleophthalmology was used for postglaucoma surgery monitoring of Intraocular Pressure. In NZ, teleophthalmology was used for general eye consults and triaging, but no formal models were described. Conclusion: COVID-19 offered a unique opportunity for re-examination and expansion of teleophthalmology services globally. Video-based and home-screening teleophthalmology services are feasible but have limitations. Investing in multidisciplinary and community-based technology partnerships can create more equitable teleophthalmology care models (to complement and, when necessary, replace traditional in-person consults), within existing frameworks, making eye care more accessible and efficient. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Split-plot experimental data are often analyzed as if the data came from a completely randomized design. As is well known, ignoring the different levels of randomization and replication can lead to serious inferential errors. However, in some experiments, including many of the ocean global change experiments that motivated this research, variation between whole-plot experimental units may be small relative to variation between subplot units. Even though a factorial analysis will often perform poorly in general, in this special case it outperforms a split-plot analysis, providing narrower confidence intervals for treatment means and differences with coverage rates close to the desired level. The performance of the proposed model-averaged analysis was compared to a classical split-plot analysis via a simulation study, and its utility demonstrated for an ocean global change experiment examining growth and condition of a juvenile mussel species. In our simulation study, model-averaged confidence intervals for whole-plot treatment means or comparisons of means were up to 40% narrower than split-plot confidence intervals while maintaining close to nominal coverage rates. In our example experiment, we observed narrowing of up to 25%. We recommend model averaging as a preferred approach when variation between whole-plot experimental units is expected to be less than between subplot units, with a few caveats for studies with very few replicates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The prevalence of myopia is increasing globally, putting individuals at risk of myopia-associated visual impairment. Low-dose atropine eye drops have been found to safely reduce the risk of progression from myopia to higher levels of myopia and pathological states. In New Zealand, school children have an eye check at age 11. In this study, we aimed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of introducing photorefractive screening for myopia at age 11 in the New Zealand context, with atropine 0.01% eye drops treatment for those screening positive. Patients and Methods: A Markov cohort simulation was used to model the impact of screening plus atropine compared to usual care across a lifetime horizon and societal perspective with a 3% discount rate. Cost-effectiveness was determined by the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), with utility measured in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Multivariate sensitivity analyses were carried out to investigate factors influencing cost-effectiveness. Results: The ICER for screening plus atropine was NZ$1590 (95% CI 1390, 1791) per QALY gained, with 7 cases of lifetime blindness prevented per 100,000 children screened. Conclusion: Screening for myopia with photorefraction at age 11 and atropine 0.01% eye drop treatment of children screening positive is likely to be cost-effective. These results suggest that a real-world trial and cost-effectiveness analysis would be worth considering in New Zealand. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]