Search

Prcis: Wang et al compare an FDA-registered head-mounted smartphone device (PalmScan VF2000) with standard automated perimetry (SAP) in glaucoma patients and find that the head-mounted device may not fully recapitulate SAP testing., Purpose: This study prospectively compared visual field testing using the PalmScan VF2000 Visual Field Analyzer, a head-mounted smartphone device, with standard automated perimetry (SAP)., Methods: Patients with glaucoma undergoing Humphrey Field Analyzer SAP testing were asked to complete in-office PalmScan testing using a Samsung S5 smartphone in a virtual reality-style headset. Glaucoma severity was defined as SAP mean deviation (MD) >-6 dB for mild, between -6 and -12 dB for moderate, and <-12 dB for severe. Global parameters MD and pattern SD from PalmScan and SAP were compared using t -tests and Bland-Altman analyses. Bland-Altmann analyses of PalmScan and SAP MD were conducted for the superonasal, superotemporal, inferonasal, and inferotemporal visual field quadrants. The repeatability of PalmScan was assessed using Spearman's correlations and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs)., Results: Fifty-one patients (51 eyes) completed both SAP and PalmScan testing and met the criteria for analysis. Compared with SAP, global MD and pattern SD measurements from PalmScan differed by an average of +0.62±0.26 dB (range: -3.25 to +4.60 dB) and -1.00±0.24 dB (range: -6.03 to +2.77 dB), respectively, while MD scores from individual visual field quadrants differed by as much as -6.58 to +11.43 dB. The agreement between PalmScan and SAP in classifying glaucoma severity was 86.3% across all eyes. PalmScan and SAP identified the same quadrant as having the worst visual field defect in 66.7% of eyes., Conclusions: Despite advantages in cost and accessibility, the PalmScan head-mounted perimetry device may not be able to fully recapitulate SAP testing., Competing Interests: Disclosure: The authors declare no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Orthotopic heart transplantation (OHT) improves survival in eligible patients. Organ scarcity necessitates extensive clinical and psychosocial evaluations before listing. The Stanford Integrated Psychosocial Assessment for Transplant (SIPAT) predicts risk for poor psychosocial outcomes and morbidity in the first year post-transplant, yet it is unknown whether it predicts long-term outcomes., Methods: Blinded examiners obtained data from a retrospective cohort of 51 OHT recipients from a high-volume center. Patients with "Excellent" or "Good" SIPAT score indicating low psychosocial risk for transplant (E/G) were compared with those who met "Minimum Acceptable Criteria" or were "High Risk" (MAC/HR). Associations were examined between SIPAT group and outcomes., Results: MAC/HR versus E/G recipients had significantly reduced survival in the 10 years post-OHT (mean 6.7 vs 8.8 years, p = 0.027; 55% vs 82% survival proportions, p = 0.037). MAC/HR patients were more likely to live in a county with greater income inequality (p = 0.025) and have psychiatric history pre-OHT (p = 0.046). Both groups had otherwise similar demographics and medical history. A lower proportion of MAC/HR patients adhered to medications post-OHT and a greater proportion had psychiatric illness, though differences were not significant., Conclusions: Higher-risk SIPAT scores predict reduced long-term survival post-OHT. Further efforts are crucial to improve outcomes in higher-risk patients., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest This work did not receive any funding or material contributions pertinent to the manuscript. Authors have no declarations of interest., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Medication nonadherence following myocardial infarction (MI) is prevalent and increases the risk of recurrent cardiovascular events. Socioeconomic factors including medication cost, financial insecurity, and poor health literacy are associated with nonadherence. We present a patient with a history of recurrent MI who was nonadherent due to socioeconomic challenges. Our patient subsequently developed ST-elevation MI secondary to in-stent thrombosis. This case illustrates the importance of pre-discharge screening for barriers to adherence., Competing Interests: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article., (© The Author(s) 2023.)