The Impact of COVID-19 and Pandemic Mitigation Measures on Persons With Sensory Impairment

Mental healthcare access among US adults with vision impairment and depression and/or anxiety symptoms

BACKGROUND

Although individuals with vision impairment are at greater risk for depression and anxiety, there has been limited study of mental healthcare utilization among this population.

OBJECTIVES

To address this gap, this pooled cross-sectional study estimates the prevalence of mental healthcare utilization among individuals with vision impairment during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

We calculated adjusted relative risk ratios and 95% confidence intervals of depression and/or anxiety symptoms and mental healthcare utilization using multinomial logistic regression, accounting for demographics, social determinants of health, and survey week. The population-based, U.S. Census Bureau Household Pulse Survey was administered April 2021-March 2022. Participants included 800,935 US adults (weighted population: 174,598,530) RESULTS: Adjusting for other factors, adults with vision impairment were more likely to report depression symptoms (RRR: 2.33; 95% CI: 2.03-2.68), anxiety symptoms (RRR: 2.12; 95% CI: 1.94-2.33, and comorbid depression and anxiety symptoms (RRR: 3.77; 95% CI: 3.51-4.04) compared with individuals with no vision impairment. Among individuals reporting anxiety or depression symptoms, individuals with vision impairment (RRR: 1.46; 95% CI: 1.35-1.59) were more likely to lack of mental healthcare utilization compared with individuals with no vision impairment.

CONCLUSION

Findings suggest that individuals with vision impairment are at increased risk for depression and/or anxiety symptoms and report reduced mental healthcare utilization compared with individuals without vision impairment. Additional programs and policies are needed to improve mental healthcare utilization among individuals with vision impairment and depression and/or anxiety symptoms, such as increased telehealth accessibility and coordination of behavioral health and ophthalmology services.

Disabled people's experiences accessing healthcare services during the COVID-19 pandemic: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Disruptions to healthcare services during the COVID-19 pandemic are well-recognised problems. However, a dearth of research exists on disabled people's experiences with accessing these services. A scoping review was undertaken to identify and explore research on the experience of disabled people in accessing healthcare services between 2020 and 6 February 2023.

METHODS

PubMed, Web of Science, CINAHL, and OVID were employed to search for research that included the voice of disabled people, or their parents or caregivers. Over two distinct phases, a total of 2,201 articles were reviewed according to article titles, keywords, and abstracts. Eighty-one studies were identified that met the inclusion criteria; these were reviewed in full.

RESULTS

Eighteen studies specifically described the experiences of accessing healthcare or disability services, and sixty-three raised healthcare challenges as a secondary consideration. Many disabled people struggled to access healthcare services and felt they were invisible; as a result, individuals' mental health was negatively affected. Disabled people with compounding vulnerabilities were at the most risk of experiencing a lack of healthcare access.

CONCLUSIONS

There is an urgent need for research and policy that is responsive to disabled people's access to healthcare during the pandemic; currently many health policies are 'disability-blind' and exclude these members of the global community. Furthermore, to assist in creating disability-responsive research, funding needs to prioritise researchers within the disabled community.

Investigating the impact of COVID-19 on individuals with visual impairment

We present a comprehensive review of the various challenges that individuals with visual impairment (VI) face during the COVID-19 pandemic. A structured review was done using online databases PubMed, EMBASE, and grey literature databases between 19 April 2021 and 4 August 2021, using search terms ‘COVID-19’, ‘SARS-CoV-2’, ‘Coronavirus’, or ‘pandemic’ combined with ‘visually impaired’, ‘visual impairment’, or ‘Blind’. Studies included were written in English, published after the World Health Organization (WHO) declaration of the COVID-19 Pandemic (11 March 2020), and focused on the VI population during the pandemic. The initial search yielded 702 publications, of which 20 met our inclusion criteria and were included in analysis. Emotional distress from deteriorating mental health and social isolation were considerably higher in the VI population. For a community that relies on spatial awareness and touch, regulations related to social distancing and avoiding contact were considerable barriers. Further challenges were noted in accessing healthcare, care, receiving timely health information and changes in regulations, adequately sanitizing, using technology, and completing activities of daily living. In the unprecedented times of the COVID-19 pandemic, the VI community has faced unique challenges. A more holistic and inclusive approach needs to be adopted to ensure that more vulnerable populations are adequately cared for.

Promoting equity in health emergencies through health systems strengthening: lessons learned from disability inclusion in the COVID-19 pandemic

Discriminatory health systems and inequalities in service provision inevitably create barriers for certain populations in a health emergency. Persons with disabilities have been disproportionately affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. They commonly experience three increased risks - of contracting the disease, of severe disease or death, and of new or worsening health conditions. These added risks occur due to a range of barriers in the health sector, including physical barriers that prevent access to health facilities and specific interventions; informational barriers that prevent access to health information and/or reduce health literacy; and attitudinal barriers which give rise to stigma and exclusion, all of which add to discrimination and inequality. Furthermore, national health emergency preparedness and planning may fail to consider the needs and priorities of persons with disabilities, in all their diversity, thus leaving them behind in responses. This commentary discusses the importance of inclusive health systems strengthening as a prerequisite for accessible and comprehensive health emergency preparedness and response plans that reach everyone. Lessons learned relating to disability inclusion in the COVID-19 pandemic can inform health systems strengthening in recovery efforts, addressing underlying barriers to access and inclusion, and in turn improving preparedness for future health emergencies.

Incidence of Accommodations for Patients With Significant Vision Limitations in Physicians' Offices in the US

Importance

Despite documented disparities in health care for patients with significant vision impairments and legal mandates that patients with disability receive equitable care, little is known about the extent to which physicians practicing in the US accommodate these patients in outpatient clinical settings.

Objective

To empirically explore the extent of basic accommodations physicians practicing in the US provide to patients with significant vision limitations in outpatient care.

Design, Setting, and Participants

In this physician survey study, randomly selected physicians were surveyed throughout the US on their attitudes toward patients with disability. A total of 1400 randomly selected active board-certified physicians representing 7 specialties (family medicine, general internal medicine, rheumatology, neurology, ophthalmology, orthopedic surgery, and obstetrics-gynecology) were surveyed. Data were collected from October 2019 to June 2020.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Reported use of basic accommodations when caring for patients with significant vision limitations (defined here as blind or significant difficulty seeing even with glasses or other corrective lenses). Physicians' accommodation performance was assessed based on whether they always or usually described the clinic space and always or usually provided printed material in large font. Use of Braille materials was reported too rarely to include in analyses.

Results

Of the 462 survey participants, 297 of 457 (65.0%) were male. The weighted response rate was 61.0%. Only 48 physicians (9.1%; 95% CI, 6.6-12.3) provided both accommodations (always or usually describing clinic spaces and providing large-font materials), while 267 (60.2%; 95% CI, 55.3-65.0) provided neither of these accommodations. Although 62.8% (95% CI, 57.5-67.8; n = 245) of nonophthalmologists did not provide either accommodation, 29.3% (95% CI, 20.1-40.7; n = 22) of ophthalmologists also did not do so; only 24.0% (95% CI, 15.6-35.0; n = 18) of ophthalmologists provided both accommodations compared with 8.4% (95% CI, 5.4-12.7) of other physicians.

Conclusions and Relevance

This survey study suggests that less than one-tenth of physicians practicing in the US who care for patients with significant vision limitations usually or always describe clinic spaces or provide large-font materials, and less than one-third of ophthalmologists do so. Actions to address this seem warranted.