Development and Validation of a Smartphone-Based Visual Acuity Test (Vision at Home)

Real-world application of a smartphone-based visual acuity test (WHOeyes) with automatic distance calibration

BACKGROUND

To develop and assess the usability of a smartphone-based visual acuity (VA) test with an automatic distance calibration (ADC) function, the iOS version of WHOeyes.

METHODS

The WHOeyes was an upgraded version with a distinct feature of ADC of an existing validated VA testing app called V@home. Three groups of Chinese participants with different ages (≤20, 20-40, >40 years) were recruited for distance and near VA testing using both an Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart and the WHOeyes. The ADC function would determine the testing distance. Infrared rangefinder was used to determine the testing distance for the ETDRS, and actual testing distance for the WHOeyes. A questionnaire-based interview was administered to assess the satisfaction.

RESULTS

The actual testing distance determined by the WHOeyes ADC showed an overall good agreement with the desired testing distance in all three age groups (p>0.50). Regarding the distance and near VA testing, the accuracy of WHOeyes was equivalent to ETDRS. The mean difference between the WHOeyes and ETDRS ranged from -0.084 to 0.012 logMAR, and the quadratic weighted kappa (QWK) values were >0.75 across all groups. The test-retest reliability of WHOeyes was high for both near and distance VA, with a mean difference ranging from -0.040 to 0.004 logMAR and QWK all >0.85. The questionnaire revealed an excellent user experience and acceptance of WHOeyes.

CONCLUSIONS

WHOeyes could provide accurate measurement of the testing distance as well as the distance and near VA when compared to the gold standard ETDRS chart.

Estimating Visual Acuity Without a Visual Acuity Chart

Purpose

This study explored whether visual acuity (VA) can be inferred from self-reported ability to recognize everyday objects using a set of yes/no questions.

Methods

Participants answered 100 yes/no questions designed to assess their ability to recognize familiar objects at typical viewing distances, such as distinguishing between a full moon and a half moon on a clear night. The questions demanded VA ranging from normal to severe vision impairment. Responses were analyzed using item response theory, and the results were compared with participants' VA values.

Results

We recruited 385 participants from 4 sites in the United States. Participants had a mean age of 56.7 years with VA ranging from -0.3 to 2.0 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) (mean = 0.58). A strong relationship was observed between participants' estimated vision ability and their VA (r = -0.72). The linear relationship can be used to predict each participant's VA based on their estimated vision ability. The average signed and unsigned prediction errors were 0 and 0.24 logMAR, respectively, with a coefficient of repeatability of 0.59 logMAR between the estimated VA and measured VA. The same linear function was used to determine the VA limit required for each question. For instance, the VA limit for the moon question was 1.0 logMAR.

Conclusions

Yes/no questions about everyday visual activities have the potential to estimate an individual's VA. Future refinements may enhance reliability.

Translational Relevance

The survey provides insights into the real-world visual capabilities of people with low vision, making it potentially useful for telehealth applications.

Novel Technologies in Artificial Intelligence and Telemedicine for Glaucoma Screening

PURPOSE

To provide an overview of novel technologies in telemedicine and artificial intelligence (AI) approaches for cost-effective glaucoma screening.

METHODS/RESULTS

A narrative review was performed by summarizing research results, recent developments in glaucoma detection and care, and considerations related to telemedicine and AI in glaucoma screening. Telemedicine and AI approaches provide the opportunity for novel glaucoma screening programs in primary care, optometry, portable, and home-based settings. These approaches offer several advantages for glaucoma screening, including increasing access to care, lowering costs, identifying patients in need of urgent treatment, and enabling timely diagnosis and early intervention. However, challenges remain in implementing these systems, including integration into existing clinical workflows, ensuring equity for patients, and meeting ethical and regulatory requirements. Leveraging recent work towards standardized data acquisition as well as tools and techniques developed for automated diabetic retinopathy screening programs may provide a model for a cost-effective approach to glaucoma screening.

CONCLUSION

Leveraging novel technologies and advances in telemedicine and AI-based approaches to glaucoma detection show promise for improving our ability to detect moderate and advanced glaucoma in primary care settings and target higher individuals at high risk for having the disease.

Assessment of visual function using mobile Apps

With the advances in smartphone and tablet screens, as well as their processing power and software, mobile apps have been developed reporting to assess visual function. This review assessed those mobile apps that have been evaluated in the scientific literature to measure visual acuity, reading metrics, contrast sensitivity, stereoacuity, colour vision and visual fields; these constitute just a small percentage of the total number of mobile apps reporting to measure these metrics available for tablets and smartphones. In general, research suggests that most of the mobile apps evaluated can accurately mimic most traditionally paper-based tests of visual function, benefitting from more even illumination from the backlit screen and aspects such as multiple tests and versions (to minimise memorisation) being available on the same equipment. Some also utilise the in-built device sensors to monitor aspects such as working distance and screen tilt. As the consequences of incorrectly recording visual function and using this to inform clinical management are serious, clinicians must check on the validity of a mobile app before adopting it as part of clinical practice.

A new, adaptive, self-administered, and generalizable method used to measure visual acuity

SIGNIFICANCE

Angular Indication Measurement (AIM) is an adaptive, self-administered, and generalizable orientation-judgment method designed to interrogate visual functions. We introduce AIM Visual Acuity (VA) and show its features and outcome measures. Angular Indication Measurement VA's ability to detect defocus was comparable with that of an Early Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) letter chart and showed greater sensitivity to astigmatic blur.

PURPOSE

This proof-of-concept study introduces Angular Indication Measurement and applies it to VA.

METHODS

First, we compared the ability of AIM-VA and ETDRS to detect defocus and astigmatic blur in 22 normally sighted adults. Spherical and cylindrical lenses in the dominant eye induced blur. Second, we compared repeatability over two tests of AIM-VA and ETDRS.

RESULTS

A repeated-measure analysis of variance showed a main effect for defocus blur and test. For the astigmatism experiment, an interaction between blur and orientation was found. Pairwise comparisons showed that AIM was more sensitive to astigmatic-induced VA loss than ETDRS. Bland-Altman plots showed small bias and no systematic learning effect for either test type and improved repeatability with more than two adaptive steps for AIM-VA.

CONCLUSIONS

Angular Indication Measurement VA's ability to detect defocus was comparable with that of an ETDRS letter chart and showed greater sensitivity to induced astigmatic blur, and AIM-VA's repeatability is comparable with ETDRS when using two or more adaptive steps. Angular Indication Measurement's self-administered orientation judgment approach is generalizable to interrogate other visual functions, e.g., contrast, color, motion, and stereovision.

Development and Evaluation of a New Self-Administered Near Visual Acuity Chart: Accuracy and Feasibility of Usage

Background: Visual acuity (VA) assessments are crucial in ophthalmology but traditionally rely on in-clinic evaluations. The emergence of telemedicine has spurred interest in creating dependable self-administered VA tests for use beyond standard clinical environments. This study evaluated the practicality and validity of a self-administered near VA card test against traditional Snellen and Rosenbaum Pocket Vision Screener (RPVS) methods for home monitoring and enhancing clinical workflow. Methods: In a cross-sectional study, a near VA card (Hadassah Self-Visual Acuity Screener (HSVA)) was developed with written and videotaped instructions for self-use. Patients with a minimal best-corrected VA (BCVA) of 1.0 LogMAR in at least one eye were recruited from ophthalmology and optometry clinics. Outcomes included the mean BCVA difference between the self-administered values and those obtained by the examiner, and correlations between BCVA values obtained by the Snellen, RPVS, HSVA, and previous distance BCVA methods according to the patients' electronic medical records. Results: A total of 275 participants (mean age: 42.5 ± 19.4 years; range: 18-89 years; 47% female) were included. Test-retest reliability analysis of the HSVA demonstrated a very good correlation and repeatability (n = 38 patients; Rs = 1.0; p < 0.001). Accuracy analysis revealed the mean LogMAR BCVA values of an additional 237 patients obtained by the Snellen, RPVS, and HSVA methods were similar (p = 0.10). The self-test BCVA results obtained by the HSVA agreed with the masked examiner-tested VA results (n = 67 patients; p = 0.17; Rs = 0.87; ICC = 0.96). Similar results were obtained when stratification by median age (42 years) was performed. Bland-Altman analysis of the HSVA and RPVS methods demonstrated a good agreement. To assess whether the HSVA could predict the VA results in the clinically used charts, multivariate analysis was used and revealed that the HSVA predicted the RPVS results (β = 0.91; p = 0.001; R2 = 0.88), and the self-test HSVA predicted the Snellen VA results within two lines (β = 0.93; p = 0.01; R2 = 0.36). Conclusions: The home-based HSVA assessment exhibited high test-retest reliability, accuracy, and alignment with clinical-standard VA tests. Its efficacy in self-testing mirrored examiner-conducted VA assessments and accurately predicted Snellen VA outcomes, indicating the HSVA's suitability for self-monitoring in chronic ocular conditions or when access to conventional examinations is limited. The utility of self-administered VA tests may extend beyond ophthalmology and optometry, potentially benefiting primary care, emergency medicine, and neurology. Further research is needed to explore and validate the practical applications of remote VA testing.

Remote Monitoring of Visual Function in Patients with Maculopathy: The Aphelion Study

INTRODUCTION

Remote monitoring of vision, using tools such as the shape discrimination hyperacuity (SDH) test, can detect disease activity in patients with maculopathy. We determined the in-clinic accuracy and repeatability of three myVisionTrack expanded version (mVTx) tests for self-testing of visual acuity (VA) and contrast sensitivity.

METHODS

Aphelion, a single-arm, prospective study conducted at two sites in the USA, included adults with any maculopathy and a baseline VA of 0.7 log of minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) (Snellen 20/100) or better. Participants completed the mVTx tests (tumbling E, Landolt C, contrast sensitivity, and SDH) and standard clinical tests (near and distance Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study [ETDRS] charts and the Pelli-Robson contrast sensitivity chart). Test-retest repeatability and agreement between the mVTx tests and the corresponding clinical test were assessed by Bland-Altman analyses. Participants also completed a usability survey.

RESULTS

The mean age of the 122 participants was 67 years. The most common diagnosis was age-related macular degeneration (42% of patients). The tumbling E test had a test-retest 95% limit of agreement (LoA) of ± 0.18 logMAR; the Landolt C test, ± 0.23 logMAR; the SDH test, ± 0.24 logMAR; and the contrast sensitivity test, ± 0.32 log contrast threshold (logCT). Compared with the distance ETDRS chart, the LoA was ± 0.35 logMAR for the tumbling E test (mean difference, - 0.07 logMAR) and ± 0.39 logMAR for the Landolt C test (mean difference, 0.03 logMAR). For the contrast sensitivity test, the LoA compared with the Pelli-Robson chart was ± 0.30 logCT (mean difference, - 0.25 logCT). Most participants (85%) reported that they learned the tests quickly. The tumbling E test scored the highest on ease of use.

CONCLUSION

The mVTx tests of VA are accurate and repeatable, supporting their potential use alongside the SDH test to detect disease progression remotely between clinic visits.

A proposed methodology for conducting a remote rigid gas permeable contact lens consultation

PURPOSE

COVID-19 spread to numerous countries, overwhelming healthcare systems and economies worldwide. COVID-19 restrictions have prevented patients from attending consultations in person and led to the further development of telemedicine to provide health care. The situation also applies to contact lens (CL) practitioners and their patients; telemedicine enables practitioners to provide patients with regular and continuing care. This study aimed to investigate available tools to enable continuing care for rigid gas permeable (RGP) CL wearers who are unable to attend face-to-face consultations.

METHODS

The study consists of three components. Firstly, an approach to enable the assessment of a patient's CL fitting and cornea remotely. Secondly, to find an affordable and reliable method to obtain a patient's visual acuity (VA), and thirdly, to develop a questionnaire to provide practitioners with information to deliver optimal patient care.

RESULTS

The use of a macro lens, smartphone, and auxiliary materials enables high-quality images of the anterior eye and RGP CL to be obtained. Two free and validated smartphone applications (apps) for VA measurements were identified which are available on Android and iOS systems. Two questionnaires were also developed to enable practitioners to obtain additional patient information to facilitate optimal patient care.

CONCLUSION

This study has developed the components of a remote CL consultation to enable patients who cannot attend scheduled appointments to receive care and advice to ensure the safety of their RGP CL wear. The tools involved in this study are low-cost, affordable, and an adjunct, not a substitute, for face-to-face consultations.

AIM (Angular Indication Measurement)- Visual Acuity: An adaptive, self-administered, and generalizable vision assessment method used to measure visual acuity

This proof-of-concept study introduces Angular Indication Measurement and applies it to VA (AIM-VA). First, we compared the ability of AIM-VA and ETDRS to detect defocus and astigmatic blur in 22 normally-sighted adults. Spherical and cylindrical lenses (±0.00D, +0.25D, +0.50D, +0.75D, +1.00D, +2.00D and +0.50D, +1.00D, +2.00D each at 0°, 90°, 135°, respectively) in the dominant eye induced blur. Second, we compared repeatability over two tests of AIM-VA and ETDRS. A 2-way-ANOVA showed a main effect for defocus-blur and test with no interaction. A 3-way-ANOVA for the astigmatism experiment revealed main effects for test type, blur, and direction and with no interactions. Planned multiple comparisons showed AIM had greater astigmatic-induced VA loss than ETDRS. Bland-Altman plots showed small bias and no systematic learning effect for either test type and improved repeatability with >2 adaptive steps for AIM-VA. AIM-VA's ability to detect defocus was comparable with that of an ETDRS letter chart and showed greater sensitivity to astigmatic blur, and AIM-VA's repeatability is comparable with ETDRS when using 2 or more adaptive steps. AIM's self-administered orientation judgment approach is generalizable to interrogate other visual functions, e.g., contrast, color, motion, stereo-vision.

Accuracy and reliability of self-administered visual acuity tests: Systematic review of pragmatic trials

BACKGROUND

Remote self-administered visual acuity (VA) tests have the potential to allow patients and non-specialists to assess vision without eye health professional input. Validation in pragmatic trials is necessary to demonstrate the accuracy and reliability of tests in relevant settings to justify deployment. Here, published pragmatic trials of these tests were synthesised to summarise the effectiveness of available options and appraise the quality of their supporting evidence.

METHODS

A systematic review was undertaken in accordance with a preregistered protocol (CRD42022385045). The Cochrane Library, Embase, MEDLINE, and Scopus were searched. Screening was conducted according to the following criteria: (1) English language; (2) primary research article; (3) visual acuity test conducted out of eye clinic; (4) no clinical administration of remote test; (5) accuracy or reliability of remote test analysed. There were no restrictions on trial participants. Quality assessment was conducted with QUADAS-2.

RESULTS

Of 1227 identified reports, 10 studies were ultimately included. One study was at high risk of bias and two studies exhibited concerning features of bias; all studies were applicable. Three trials-of DigiVis, iSight Professional, and Peek Acuity-from two studies suggested that accuracy of the remote tests is comparable to clinical assessment. All other trials exhibited inferior accuracy, including conflicting results from a pooled study of iSight Professional and Peek Acuity. Two studies evaluated test-retest agreement-one trial provided evidence that DigiVis is as reliable as clinical assessment. The three most accurate tests required access to digital devices. Reporting was inconsistent and often incomplete, particularly with regards to describing methods and conducting statistical analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Remote self-administered VA tests appear promising, but further pragmatic trials are indicated to justify deployment in carefully defined contexts to facilitate patient or non-specialist led assessment. Deployment could augment teleophthalmology, non-specialist eye assessment, pre-consultation triage, and autonomous long-term monitoring of vision.

Validity and Reliability of Vis-Screen Application: A Smartphone-Based Distance Vision Testing for Visual Impairment and Blindness Vision Screening

Background and Objectives: The health-related mobile applications (app) might assist in promoting inclusive health and tele-treatment, especially for the less severe diseases. In this paper, a study had been done to determine the app's reliability in terms of raters and the app's agreement with the Snellen chart. Materials and Methods: A cross-sectional sectional study was conducted between November 2019 and September 2020. Participants were selected via purposive sampling from selected communities in Terengganu state. All participants underwent vision testing with the Vis-Screen app and Snellen chart for validity and reliability accordingly. Results: A total of 408 participants were involved, with a mean age of 29.3. The sensitivity of the presenting vision of the right eye (PVR) ranged from 55.6% to 88.4%, with specificity between 94.7% to 99.3%, while the positive and negative predictive values were between 57.9% and 81.7% and 96.8% and 99.0%, respectively. The positive likelihood ratios ranged between 16.73 and 73.89, whereas the negative likelihood ratios ranged from 0.12 to 0.45. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) for all cut-off points ranged between 0.93 and 0.97, and the optimum cut-off point was at 6/12. The kappa values for intra-rater and inter-rater were 0.85 and 0.75, respectively, while the app's reliability with the Snellen chart was 0.61. Conclusions: Vis-Screen was concluded to be valid and reliable for use as a screening tool for detecting individuals with visual impairment and blindness in the community. A valid and reliable portable vision screener like Vis-Screen will help expand the eye care feasibility while providing similar accuracy as the conventional charts in clinical practices.

Design and Validation of a Novel Smartphone-Based Visual Acuity Test: The K-VA Test

INTRODUCTION

Visual acuity (VA) testing is a critical screening examination for the assessment of visual function. This study describes the development and validation of a smartphone-based VA test: the K-VA test.

METHODS

A total of 171 patients with various ocular diseases were examined in our outpatient unit at Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, School of Medicine in Greece. Participants underwent VA examination using the standard Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) charts and the K-VA smartphone-based test. The K-VA test was performed by participants themselves. The Bland-Altman method was employed to assess the agreement between the ETDRS charts and the new test for the examination of VA at 1 m and 40 cm. Test-retest reliability was also calculated. A questionnaire regarding the participants' feedback on the K-VA test was completed.

RESULTS

No significant bias was observed between the gold standard ETDRS charts and the K-VA test measurements. The mean difference (95% limits of agreement, LoA) between the K-VA test at 1 m and the ETDRS chart at 4 m was -0.006 (95% LoA -0.129 to 0.117) logarithm of the minimal angle of resolution (logMAR). The agreement of the K-VA test at 40 cm with the near ETDRS chart was also high with a mean difference of -0.007 (95% LoA -0.105 to 0.090) logMAR. Test-retest reliability was found to be high with a mean difference of 0.003 (95% LoA -0.045 to 0.033) logMAR and 0.005 (95% LoA -0.065 to 0.076) logMAR for the K-VA test at 1 m and 40 cm, respectively. A total of 97 participants answered the questionnaire and 71 (73.2%) stated that the test was easy to very easy to use for self-performance.

CONCLUSIONS

The study demonstrated that the K-VA application performed well compared with the ETDRS charts and provides reliable and repeatable measurements of VA across a wide range of VA.

Clinical validation of a novel smartphone application for measuring best corrected visual acuity

PURPOSE

Personal mobile devices such as smartphones are proving their usefulness in ever more applications in tele-eyecare. An inconvenience and potential source of error in these past approaches stemmed from the requirement for the subjects to situate their devices at a distance. The present study aims to clinically validate best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) measures carried out by a novel smartphone application "vision.app" (VisionApp Solutions S.L.) using comparative statistics against clinical measurements.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

BCVA was measured in both eyes of 40 subjects using vision.app which displayed a black Landolt-C optotype with crowding on a white background, and utilized a 4 forced-choice procedure for the subjects to find (by means of swiping in either of four directions) the smallest optotype size they could resolve. Results were compared to BCVA measurements taken using a standard Snellen chart placed at 20 feet (6 m).

RESULTS

The t-test revealed no significant differences between the app- and clinically-measured VA (p = 0.478 (OD) and 0.608 (OS)), with a mean difference between clinical and app measurements of less than one line of the eye chart (-0.009 logMAR (OD) and -0.005 logMAR (OS)). A limit of agreement for a 95% confidence interval of ± 0.08 logMAR for OD and OS was found.

CONCLUSIONS

The results show the potential use of a smartphone to measure BCVA at a handheld distance. The newly validated study results can hold major future advancements in tele-eyecare and provide eye care professionals with a reliable and accessible method to measure BCVA.

Evaluation of a visual acuity eHealth tool in patients with cataract

PURPOSE

To validate the Easee web-based tool for the assessment of visual acuity in patients who underwent cataract surgery.

SETTING

University Eye Clinic Maastricht, Maastricht, the Netherlands.

DESIGN

Prospective method comparison study.

METHODS

Subjects aged between 18 and 69 years who underwent cataract surgery on 1 or both eyes at the Maastricht University Medical Center+ were eligible to participate in this study. The uncorrected (UDVA) and corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) assessments were performed using the web-based tool (index test) and conventional ETDRS and Snellen charts (reference tests). The outcomes of the different tests were expressed in logMAR, and a difference of <0.15 logMAR was considered clinically acceptable.

RESULTS

46 subjects with 75 operated eyes were included in this study. The difference of the UDVA between the web-based tool and ETDRS or Snellen was -0.05 ± 0.10 logMAR ( P < .001 [0.15; -0.26]) and -0.04 ± 0.15 logMAR ( P = .018 [0.24; -0.33]), respectively. For the CDVA, these differences were -0.04 ± 0.08 logMAR ( P < .001 [0.13; -0.21]) and -0.07 ± 0.10 logMAR ( P < .001 [0.13; -0.27]), respectively. The Pearson correlation coefficients between the web-based tool and ETDRS were maximally 0.94 and compared with Snellen 0.92. In total, 73% to 88% of the visual acuity measurement differences were within 0.15 logMAR.

CONCLUSIONS

The web-based tool was validated for the assessment of visual acuity in patients who underwent cataract surgery and showed clinically acceptable outcomes in up to 88% of patients. Most of the participants had a positive attitude toward the web-based tool, which requires basic digital skills.

Agreement between a mobile applet-based visual acuity self-test program and the conventional method for distance and near visual acuity tests

BACKGROUND

To investigate the agreement between a mobile applet-based visual acuity (VA) self-test program and the conventional VA tests.

METHODS

This consecutive case series study included 121 children and adults (242 eyes). Patients were classified into three groups according to age (children, adolescents, and adults). They underwent uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) testing, distance visual acuity with available spectacle correction (DVA with ASC) testing at 2.5-m distance, uncorrected near visual acuity (UNVA) testing, and near visual acuity with available spectacle correction (NVA with ASC) testing at a 0.4-m distance using a mobile applet-based VA self-test program and conventional VA tests in two eyes.

RESULTS

Correlations among UDVA, DVA with ASC, UNVA, and NVA with ASC between the two methods were significant in all subjects (all p < 0.001). The intraclass correlation coefficient were 0.960, 0.845, 0.960, and 0.669, respectively (all p < 0.001). The proportions of bias outside the 95% confidence interval limit of agreements were 6.20%, 4.82%, 7.08%, and 6.10%, respectively. There were significant differences in NVA with ASC between the two methods (p < 0.05) in the adolescent group, but no differences in measured parameters were found among children and adult groups.

CONCLUSIONS

There is good agreement between the mobile applet-based VA self-test program and the conventional VA tests. The VA self-test has good practical value especially in the current pandemic, allowing self-screening of visual acuity, myopia control, and remote management of visual impairment in ocular morbidity.

Is your vision blurry? A systematic review of home-based visual acuity for telemedicine

INTRODUCTION

Visual acuity (VA) testing is a vital screening tool for the assessment of ocular function. The coronavirus 2019 pandemic has caused an immediate need for synchronous telemedicine in all specialties, including ophthalmology. While a plethora of mobile VA applications exist, there is no consensus as to what technology can accurately and reproducibly measure a patient's vision at home.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed in April 2020 using PubMed, Embase and Medline, identifying English publications from 2010 to 2020 on remote VA tests: 4338 articles were identified and 14 were ultimately included in the review.

RESULTS

Of those 14, the highest quality studies, best reproducibility and correlation with in-clinic acuities measured were found using the Peek Acuity application. The studies included patients throughout the world aged 3-97, with and without correction, with known ocular pathology.The Peek Acuity studies measured distance vision on a Samsung Galaxy S3 with a mean difference of 0.055 Logarithm of the Minimum Angle of Resolution (LogMAR) for home testing compared with the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS). Test-retest variability was ±0.029 LogMAR for 95% confidence interval limits.

DISCUSSION

There can be one or more lines of variability in vision testing in a clinical setting using reference standard ETDRS and clinical standard Snellen charts. Test-retest reliability is not perfect even on standard clinical charts (variation up to 0.48 LogMAR). Of the technologies reviewed, Peek Acuity home testing had the greatest correlation with ETDRS clinical vision and high test-retest reliability. Peek Acuity performed no worse than Snellen and ETDRS charts.

A systematic review of reading tests

Adequate near and intermediate visual capacity is important in performing everyday tasks, especially after the introduction of smartphones and computers in our professional and recreational activities. Primary objective of this study was to review all available reading tests both conventional and digital and explore their integrated characteristics. A systematic review of the recent literature regarding reading charts was performed based on the PubMed, Google Scholar, and Springer databases between February and March 2021. Data from 11 descriptive and 24 comparative studies were included in the present systematic review. Clinical settings are still dominated by conventional printed reading charts; however, the most prevalent of them (i.e., Jaeger type charts) are not validated. Reliable reading capacity assessment is done only by those that comply with the International Council of Ophthalmology (ICO) recommendations. Digital reading tests are gaining popularity both in clinical and research settings and are differentiated in standard computer-based applications that require installation either in a computer or a tablet (e.g., Advanced VISION Test and web-based ones e.g., Democritus Digital Acuity Reading Test requires no installation). It is evident that validated digital tests will prevail in future clinical or research settings and it is upon ophthalmologists to select the one most compatible with their examination routine.

Estimation of best corrected visual acuity based on deep neural network

In this study, we investigated a convolutional neural network (CNN)-based framework for the estimation of the best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) from fundus images. First, we collected 53,318 fundus photographs from the Gyeongsang National University Changwon Hospital, where each fundus photograph is categorized into 11 levels by retrospective medical chart review. Then, we designed 4 BCVA estimation schemes using transfer learning with pre-trained ResNet-18 and EfficientNet-B0 models where both regression and classification-based prediction are taken into account. According to the results of the study, the predicted BCVA by CNN-based schemes is close to the actual value such that 94.37% of prediction accuracy can be achieved when 3 levels of difference can be tolerated during prediction. The mean squared error and [Formula: see text] score were measured as 0.028 and 0.654, respectively. These results indicate that the BCVA can be predicted accurately for extreme cases, i.e., the level of BCVA is close to either 0.0 or 1.0. Moreover, using the Guided Grad-CAM, we confirmed that the macula and the blood vessel surrounding the macula are mainly utilized in the prediction of BCVA, which validates the rationality of the CNN-based BCVA estimation schemes since the same area is also exploited during the retrospective medical chart review. Finally, we applied the t-distributed stochastic neighbor embedding to examine the characteristics of CNN-based BCVA estimation schemes. The developed BCVA estimation schemes can be employed to obtain the objective measurement of BVCA as well as the medical screening of people with poor access to medical care through smartphone-based fundus imaging.

Validation of the New York University Langone Eye Test Application, a Smartphone-Based Visual Acuity Test

PURPOSE

To validate and assess user satisfaction and usability of the New York University (NYU) Langone Eye Test application, a smartphone-based visual acuity (VA) test.

DESIGN

Mixed-methods cross-sectional cohort study.

PARTICIPANTS

Two hundred forty-four eyes of 125 participants were included. All participants were adults 18 years of age or older. Participants' eyes with a VA of 20/400 (1.3 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution [logMAR]) or worse were excluded.

METHODS

Patients were tested using the clinical standard Rosenbaum near card and the NYU Langone Eye Test application on an iPhone and Android device. Each test was performed twice to measure reliability. Ten patients were selected randomly for subsequent semistructured qualitative interviews with thematic analysis.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Visual acuity was the parameter measured. Bland-Altman analysis was used to measure agreement between the results of the NYU Langone Eye Test application and Rosenbaum card, as well as test-retest reliability of each VA. The correlation between results was calculated using the intraclass correlation coefficient. Satisfaction survey and semistructured interview questions were developed to measure usability and acceptability.

RESULTS

Bland-Altman analysis revealed an agreement between the application and the Rosenbaum near card of 0.017 ± 0.28 logMAR (iPhone) and 0.009 ± 0.29 logMAR (Android). The correlation between the application and the Rosenbaum near card was 0.74 for both the iPhone and Android. Test-retest reliability was 0.003 ± 0.22 logMAR (iPhone), 0.01 ± 0.25 logMAR (Android), and 0.01 ± 0.23 logMAR (Rosenbaum card). Of the 125 participants, 97.6% found the application easy to use, and 94.3% were overall satisfied with the application. Thematic analysis yielded 6 key themes: (1) weaknesses of application, (2) benefits of the application, (3) tips for application improvement, (4) difficulties faced while using the application, (5) ideal patient for application, and (6) comparing application with traditional VA testing.

CONCLUSIONS

The NYU Langone Eye Test application is a user-friendly, accurate, and reliable measure of near VA. The application's integration with the electronic health record, accessibility, and easy interpretation of results, among other features, make it ideal for telemedicine use.

eHealth Tools That Assess and Track Health and Well-being in Children and Young People: Systematic Review

Background

eHealth tools that assess and track health outcomes in children or young people are an emerging type of technology that has the potential to reform health service delivery and facilitate integrated, interdisciplinary care.

Objective

The aim of this review is to summarize eHealth tools that have assessed and tracked health in children or young people to provide greater clarity around the populations and settings in which they have been used, characteristics of digital devices (eg, health domains, respondents, presence of tracking, and connection to care), primary outcomes, and risks and challenges of implementation.

Methods

A search was conducted in PsycINFO, PubMed or MEDLINE, and Embase in April 2020. Studies were included if they evaluated a digital device whose primary purpose was to assess and track health, focused on children or young people (birth to the age of 24 years), reported original research, and were published in peer-reviewed journals in English.

Results

A total of 39 papers were included in this review. The sample sizes ranged from 7 to 149,329 participants (median 163, mean 5155). More studies were conducted in urban (18/39, 46%) regions than in rural (3/39, 8%) regions or a combination of urban and rural areas (8/39, 21%). Devices were implemented in three main settings: outpatient health clinics (12/39, 31%), hospitals (14/39, 36%), community outreach (10/39, 26%), or a combination of these settings (3/39, 8%). Mental and general health were the most common health domains assessed, with a single study assessing multiple health domains. Just under half of the devices tracked children’s health over time (16/39, 41%), and two-thirds (25/39, 64%) connected children or young people to clinical care. It was more common for information to be collected from a single informant (ie, the child or young person, trained health worker, clinician, and parent or caregiver) than from multiple informants. The health of children or young people was assessed as a primary or secondary outcome in 36% (14/39) of studies; however, only 3% (1/39) of studies assessed whether using the digital tool improved the health of users. Most papers reported early phase research (formative or process evaluations), with fewer outcome evaluations and only 3 randomized controlled trials. Identified challenges or risks were related to accessibility, clinical utility and safety, uptake, data quality, user interface or design aspects of the device, language proficiency or literacy, sociocultural barriers, and privacy or confidentiality concerns; ways to address these barriers were not thoroughly explored.

Conclusions

eHealth tools that assess and track health in children or young people have the potential to enhance health service delivery; however, a strong evidence base validating the clinical utility, efficacy, and safety of tools is lacking, and more thorough investigation is needed to address the risks and challenges of using these emerging technologies in clinical care. At present, there is greater potential for the tools to facilitate multi-informant, multidomain assessments and longitudinally track health over time and room for further implementation in rural or remote regions and community settings around the world.

Validation of Home Visual Acuity Tests for Telehealth in the COVID-19 Era

Importance

Visual acuity (VA) is one of the most important clinical data points in ophthalmology. However, few options for validated at-home VA assessments are currently available.

Objective

To validate 3 at-home visual acuity tests in comparison with in-office visual acuity.

Design, Setting, and Participants

Between July 2020 and April 2021, eligible participants with VA of 20/200 or better were recruited from 4 university-based ophthalmology clinics (comprehensive, cornea, glaucoma, and retina clinics). Participants were prospectively randomized to self-administer 2 of 3 at-home VA tests (printed chart, mobile phone app, and website) within 3 days before their standard-of-care clinic visit. Participants completed a survey assessing usability of the at-home tests. At the clinic visit, best-corrected Snellen distance acuity was measured as the reference standard.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The at-home VA test results were compared with the in-office VA test results using paired and unpaired t tests, Pearson correlation coefficients, analysis of variance, χ2 tests, and Cohen κ agreement. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of each at-home test were calculated to detect significant VA changes (≥0.2 logMAR) from the in-office baseline.

Results

A total of 121 participants with a mean (SD) age of 63.8 (13.0) years completed the study. The mean in-office VA was 0.11 logMAR (Snellen equivalent 20/25) with similar numbers of participants from the 4 clinics. Mean difference (logMAR) between the at-home test and in-office acuity was -0.07 (95% CI, -0.10 to -0.04) for the printed chart, -0.12 (95% CI, -0.15 to -0.09) for the mobile phone app, and -0.13 (95% CI, -0.16 to -0.10) for the website test. The Pearson correlation coefficient for the printed chart was 0.72 (95% CI, 0.62-0.79), mobile phone app was 0.58 (95% CI, 0.46-0.69), and website test was 0.64 (95% CI, 0.53-0.73).

Conclusions and Relevance

The 3 at-home VA test results (printed chart, mobile phone app, and website) appeared comparable within 1 line to in-office VA measurements. Older participants were more likely to have limited access to digital tools. Further development and validation of at-home VA testing modalities is needed with the expansion of teleophthalmology care.

A Novel Smartphone-Based Color Test for Detection of Color Vision Defects in Age Related Macular Degeneration

Purpose

To evaluate the efficacy of the smartphone-based K-color test to detect color defects in patients with Age-related Macular Degeneration (AMD).

Methods

88 patients (n = 135 eyes) with AMD and 28 controls (n = 53 eyes) underwent color testing with the Hardy–Rand–Rittler (H-R-R), the K-color test, and the Ishihara test. The K-color test presents randomized colored shapes in decreasing steps of intensity, providing also a record system for result tele-transmission. Sensitivity, specificity, and reliability were examined to investigate the validity of the novel test. 26 participants with AMD also completed a questionnaire regarding the feasibility of the test.

Results

Linear mixed-effects models indicated a significant difference (p < 0.001) between AMD and normal eyes. The areas under the curve (AUC) were estimated to be 0.897 [95% CI: 0.841–0.952], 0.943 [95% CI: 0.901–0.984], and 0.931 [95% CI: 0.886–0.977] for the red, green, and blue color, respectively. Based on the H-R-R, the sensitivity of the test was 0.79, 0.90, and 0.95 for the red, green, and blue colors, respectively, and specificity was 0.88 for all colors. The new test recognized more abnormal cases than the Ishihara (sensitivity of 0.98 and 1.0 and specificity of 0.48 and 0.38 for red and green colors, respectively). Test-retest reliability was found to be high for the red [ICC = 0.996 (0.990–0.999)], green [ICC = 0.974 (0.929–0.990)], and blue [ICC = 0.992 (0.981–0.997)] colors. The majority of the asked participants stated that they could easily perform the test.

Conclusion

The K-color test was found to be sensitive and specific in detecting color defects in AMD patients. The K-color test may serve as a useful tool both for patients and their physicians.

Use of Mobile Apps for Visual Acuity Assessment: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Background

Vision impairments (VIs) and blindness are major global public health issues. A visual acuity (VA) test is one of the most crucial standard psychophysical tests of visual function and has been widely used in a broad range of health care domains, especially in many clinical settings. In recent years, there has been increasing research on mobile app–based VA assessment designed to allow people to test their VA at any time and any location.

Objective

The goal of the review was to assess the accuracy and reliability of using mobile VA measurement apps.

Methods

We searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar for relevant articles on mobile apps for VA assessment published between January 1, 2008, and July 1, 2020. Two researchers independently inspected and selected relevant studies. Eventually, we included 22 studies that assessed tablet or smartphone apps for VA measurement. We then analyzed sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy in the 6 papers we found through a meta-analysis.

Results

Most of the 22 selected studies can be considered of high quality based on the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies–2. In a meta-analysis of 6 studies involving 24,284 participants, we categorized the studies based on the age groups of the study participants (ie, aged 3-5 years, aged 6-22 years, and aged 55 years and older), examiner (ie, professional and nonprofessional examiners), and the type of mobile devices (ie, smartphone, iPad). In the group aged 3 to 5 years, the pooled sensitivity for VA app tests versus clinical VA tests was 0.87 (95% CI 0.79-0.93; P=.39), and the pooled specificity was 0.78 (95% CI 0.70-0.85; P=.37). In the group aged 6 to 22 years, the pooled sensitivity for VA app tests versus clinical VA tests was 0.86 (95% CI 0.84-0.87; P<.001), and the pooled specificity for VA app tests versus clinical VA tests was 0.91 (95% CI 0.90-0.91; P=.27). In the group aged 55 years and older, the pooled sensitivity for VA app tests versus clinical VA tests was 0.85 (95% CI 0.55-0.98), and the pooled specificity for VA app tests versus clinical VA tests was 0.98 (95% CI 0.95-0.99). We found that the nonprofessional examiner group (AUC 0.93) had higher accuracy than the professional examiner group (AUC 0.87). In the iPad-based group, the pooled sensitivity for VA app tests versus clinical VA tests was 0.86, and the pooled specificity was 0.79. In the smartphone-based group, the pooled sensitivity for VA app tests versus clinical VA tests was 0.86 (P<.001), and the pooled specificity for VA app tests versus clinical VA tests was 0.91 (P<.001).

Conclusions

In this study, we conducted a comprehensive review of the research on existing mobile apps for VA tests to investigate their diagnostic value and limitations. Evidence gained from this study suggests that mobile app–based VA tests can be useful for on-demand VI detection.

Digital Tools for the Self-Assessment of Visual Acuity: A Systematic Review

INTRODUCTION

Numerous digital tools to self-assess visual acuity have been introduced. The recent COVID-19 pandemic underlined the need for high-quality remote care. This review gives a current overview of digital tools for remotely assessing visual function and reports on their accuracy.

METHODS

We searched the databases of Embase and Pubmed, and systematically reviewed the literature, conforming to PRISMA guidelines. Two preliminary papers were added from medRxiv.org. The main outcome was the agreement of the digital tools with conventional clinical charts, as expressed by mean differences and 95% limits of agreement (95% LoA).

RESULTS

Seventeen publications included studies reported on 13 different digital tools. Most of the tools focus on distance visual acuity. The mean differences of the digital tools ranged from - 0.08 to 0.10 logMAR, when compared to traditional clinical assessments. The 95% LoA differed considerably between studies: from ± 0.08 logMAR to ± 0.47 logMAR, though the variability was less pronounced for higher visual acuities.

CONCLUSION

The low mean differences between digital visual acuity assessments and reference charts suggest clinical equivalence, though the wide 95% LoA identify a lower precision of digital self-assessments. This effect diminishes in individuals with better visual acuities, which is a common feature of visual acuity assessments. There is great potential for the digital tools to increase access to eye care and we expect the accuracy of the current tools to improve with every iteration in technology development.

Telemedicine in neuro-ophthalmology

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The COVID-19 public health emergency accelerated the adoption of telemedicine in neuro-ophthalmology. This review surveys the current telemedicine landscape and discusses associated limitations and opportunities.

RECENT FINDINGS

Logistic considerations and regulatory changes related to the COVID-19 pandemic have spurred a proliferation of tele-neuro-ophthalmic practice. One significant benefit of telemedicine is increased access to the limited number of neuro-ophthalmologists in the country. Certain elements of the neuro-ophthalmic examination can be ascertained during a video visit or through the use of mobile applications. However, data quality can be limited and more direct evaluation of the fundus currently requires the implementation of imaging techniques, such as fundus photography and/or optical coherence tomography. For cases that require it, a 'hybrid' model can be adopted in which patients physically present to designated locations for testing and subsequently participate in televisit with the physician to discuss the assessment and plan.

SUMMARY

Telemedicine provides an alternate pathway for patients to access the limited resource of neuro-ophthalmic care, and it will likely persist beyond the current COVID-19 pandemic. It has some limitations currently but continued progress in technologic, legal, and reimbursement strategies will hopefully facilitate further adoption.

Smartphone applications in ophthalmology: A quantitative analysis

Purpose:

There is limited information in literature about the scope and usability of Smartphone Applications (Apps) in ophthalmology. Eye care professionals are therefore skeptical about the benefits of smartphone Apps and are reluctant to adopt it in their day to day practice. The purpose of this study was to provide an updated overview of all Apps exclusive to ophthalmology.

Methods:

This study was a quantitative analysis of Smartphone Apps exclusively designed for ophthalmic care. The Apple iPhone and Google play store were searched for eye care themed Apps. Any App related to eye treatment and management such as visual acuity screening, eye education, calculators, eBooks, Low Vision Aids were included in the study. Data on the purpose of the Apps, target end-users, validation, App usage, user ratings, and App developer qualifications were documented.

Results:

As of March 2020, a total of 131 Apps exclusively dedicated for eye care were identified. 53% (69/131) were available in iPhones, 44% (58/131) in Android smartphones, and 3% in both. 32% (41/131) Apps were designed for visual acuity (VA) screening, 13% (17/131) for eye relaxation exercises, 12% (15/131) for professional education, and the remaining for Apps detecting color blindness, low vision aids, and assistance and patient education. Among the 131 Apps, 6 (4.5%) Apps are claimed by the developers as validated.

Conclusion:

This study unveils a wide range of smartphone Apps exclusive to ophthalmology and suggests guidelines to choose an appropriate App. The study also highlights the importance of interdisciplinary collaboration in the design, development, and validation of such Apps.

Home Monitoring for Glaucoma: Current Applications and Future Directions

Technological advances provide a number of options for glaucoma monitoring outside the office setting, including home-based tonometry and perimetry. This has the potential to revolutionize management of this chronic disease, improve access to care, and enhance patient engagement. Here, we provide an overview of existing technologies for home-based glaucoma monitoring. We also discuss areas for future research and the potential applications of these technologies to telemedicine, which has been brought to the forefront during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.

Alleviating an Increasingly Burdened Healthcare System with Telemedicine: Anterior Segment

Tele-ophthalmology is a rapidly evolving and exciting field that has become increasingly relevant amidst the current global pandemic. With advancements in technology, many components of an evaluation previously possible only in an office setting are becoming possible remotely, paving the way for at-home visits. Examples of these technologies include measurement of visual acuity using smartphones, remote monitoring of intraocular pressure using self-administered tonometers or implantable sensors, and use of digitally acquired slit-lamp or smartphone images for diagnosis of anterior segment pathology. While many examples showcasing the utility of telemedicine have been shown for diseases such as diabetic retinopathy, concerted efforts are needed to develop similar technology for anterior segment diseases. As technology continues to advance, it may be possible to diagnose and manage more anterior segment disease with telemedicine.

Comparison of Visual Acuity Measurement Using Three Methods: Standard ETDRS Chart, Near Chart and a Smartphone-Based Eye Chart Application

Purpose

To validate the Rosenbaum near vision card (Near Chart) and a smartphone-based visual acuity (VA) test (Eye Chart) against a standard retro-illuminated Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart within participants.

Materials and Methods

A cross-sectional study of participants aged ≥18 years was conducted. VA was measured in all participants using the ETDRS chart, Near Chart and smartphone-based Eye Chart application, respectively. VA was converted to logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) for statistical analysis. Eyes with ETDRS VA worse than 1.0 logMAR (20/200) were excluded. The main outcome measures were levels of agreement between VA measured using the Near Chart or Eye Chart application vs the ETDRS chart.

Results

A total of 295 eyes of 151 participants were included. One hundred participants (66.2%) were female and the mean age was 64.3 ± 12.5 years. Educational level was high school or below for 49% of participants and at Bachelor's degree or above for 51%. The median logMAR VAs of all eyes tested using the ETDRS chart, Near Chart and Eye Chart application were 0.1, 0.0 and 0.1, respectively. The median VA difference between the Near Chart vs ETDRS chart and Eye Chart application vs ETDRS chart was 0.0 logMAR in both cases for both the right eye (OD) and left eye (OS). Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) demonstrated a strong positive correlation between VA tested with the Near Chart vs ETDRS chart (OD: ICC=0.85; p<0.001, OS: ICC=0.77; p<0.001) and Eye Chart application vs ETDRS chart (OD: ICC=0.88; p<0.001, OS: ICC=0.74; p<0.001).

Conclusion

VA measurements with the Near Chart and smartphone-based Eye Chart application corresponded well to the standard ETDRS chart, suggesting potential utility of alternative portable VA tests for in-office or remote vision monitoring, particularly during periods of physical distancing such as the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) era.

Predictors of Poor Plasma Glucose Maintenance in Type II Diabetic People with Ophthalmic Complication: The Case of Dessie Hospitals in Ethiopia

BACKGROUND

Diabetes mellitus, the commonest metabolic disorder, leads to cardiovascular diseases, neurological problems, kidney injury, and visual disturbances. Such complications can be prevented by maintaining plasma glucose level in the normal range, including ophthalmic complications. Hence, this study intended to pinpoint predictors of poor plasma glucose maintenance in type II DM people with ophthalmic complication.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional survey using simple random sampling approach to recruit participants. An interviewer-based questionnaire was used and ophthalmic complication was determined by visual acuity test. We used statistical package for social sciences version 23 to analyze the data and descriptive statistics were calculated. Predictors were ascertained using multivariable logistic regression at p≤0.05. Besides, AOR with 95% CI was also estimated to show extent of association.

RESULTS

The prevalence of poor plasma glucose maintenance was 65.1% (56.6-73.6). Poor plasma maintenance was predicted by the absence of formal education (OR: 0.67; 0.20-2.23), DM history of family members (OR=4.29; 1.33-13.83), longer duration of diabetes (OR: 3.02; 1.09-8.63), insulin use (OR=10.05; 2.72-52.35), and less physical exercise (OR=2.91; 1.47-5.76).

CONCLUSION

Study subjects with no education, DM history of family members, prolonged DM, insulin medication, and inadequate exercise had higher rate of poor plasma glucose maintenance. Health professionals should educate patients on the importance of self-adherence to plasma glucose monitoring, and encourage them to practice recommended physical activity.

Tele-Neuro-Ophthalmology: Vision for 20/20 and Beyond

BACKGROUND

Telehealth provides health care to a patient from a provider at a distant location. Before the COVID-19 pandemic, adoption of telehealth modalities was increasing slowly but steadily. During the public health emergency, rapid widespread telehealth implementation has been encouraged to promote patient and provider safety and preserve access to health care.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

Evidence was acquired from English language Internet searches of the medical and business literature and following breaking news on the COVID-19 pandemic and responses from health care stakeholders, including policymakers, payers, physicians, health care organizations, and patients. We also had extensive discussions with colleagues who are developing telehealth techniques relevant to neuro-ophthalmology.

RESULTS

Regulatory, legal, reimbursement, and cultural barriers impeded the widespread adoption of telehealth before the COVID-19 pandemic. With the increased use of telehealth in response to the public health emergency, we are rapidly accumulating experience and an evidence base identifying opportunities and challenges related to the widespread adoption of tele-neuro-ophthalmology. One of the major challenges is the current inability to adequately perform funduscopy remotely.

CONCLUSIONS

Telehealth is an increasingly recognized means of health care delivery. Tele-Neuro-Ophthalmology adoption is necessary for the sake of our patients, the survival of our subspecialty, and the education of our trainees and students. Telehealth does not supplant but supplements and complements in-person neuro-ophthalmologic care. Innovations in digital optical fundus photography, mobile vision testing applications, artificial intelligence, and principles of channel management will facilitate further adoption of tele-neuro-ophthalmology and bring the specialty to the leading edge of health care delivery.

Tele-Neuro-Ophthalmology During the Age of COVID-19

Supplemental Digital Content is Available in the Text.

Incorporating Video Visits into Ophthalmology Practice: A Retrospective Analysis and Patient Survey to Assess Initial Experiences and Patient Acceptability at an Academic Eye Center

INTRODUCTION

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has led to rapid adoption of teleophthalmology to deliver eyecare remotely. The purpose of our study was to assess the implementation and patient acceptability of video consultation for outpatient ophthalmic care at our institution.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective, cross-sectional analysis and patient survey of adult patients who completed a virtual video visit at our institution from 18 March 18 through to 27 April 2020. All video visit encounters were assessed for patient characteristics, diagnoses, management, and follow-up outcomes. Patients were surveyed for their feedback on acceptability and utility of their virtual video consultation.

RESULTS

A total of 219 patients (mean age 55 years; range 21-89 years) completed 231 video visit encounters at our department over a 6-week period, of whom 118 were women (54%). About half of these encounters were acute visits (102 visits, 47%). The most common diagnosis of these visits was postoperative state (20 visits, 9% of the total), followed by conjunctivitis (16 visits, 7%), and keratitis (14 visits, 6%). The most common management decisions were medication prescription (102 visits, 46%) or reassurance (86 visits, 39%), while 17 video visit patients (8%) were escalated to an urgent, in-person evaluation. Ninety-two patients completed a follow-up survey (42% response rate), of whom 45 (49%) indicated that they might have delayed seeking care during this pandemic in the absence of a virtual video option. Seventy-two (78%) reported that they would consider participating in a video visit as an alternative to an office-based encounter in the future, and the overall video visit experience was rated highly, with a weighted mean Likert scale rating of 4.3 out of 5 (Cronbach's α = 0.88).

CONCLUSION

Virtual video visits may be used to manage a range of ophthalmic complaints. Patients participating in this survey found such video visits acceptable and timesaving, and the majority would consider using video consultations for future eyecare encounters.

Could telehealth help eye care practitioners adapt contact lens services during the COVID-19 pandemic?

The COVID-19 pandemic has necessitated government-imposed restrictions on social interactions and travel. For many, the guidance has led to new ways of working, most notably a shift towards working remotely. While eye care practitioners (ECPs) may continue to provide urgent or emergency eye care, in many cases the travel restrictions present a unique challenge by preventing conventional face-to-face examination. Telephone triage provides a useful starting point for establishing at-risk and emergency patients; but patient examination is central to contact lens patient care. The indeterminate period over which conventional practice will be suspended, and the risk that resumption of 'normal' practice could be impeded by a potential secondary peak in COVID-19 cases, hastens the need for practitioners to adapt their delivery of eyecare. Specifically, it is prudent to reflect upon supportive evidence for more comprehensive approaches to teleoptometry in contact lens practice. Smartphone based ocular imaging is an area which has seen considerable growth, particularly for imaging the posterior eye. Smartphone imaging of the anterior eye requires additional specialised instrumentation unlikely to be available to patients at home. Further, there is only limited evidence for self-administered image capture. In general, digital photographs, are useful for detection of gross anterior eye changes, but subtle changes are less discernible. For the assessment of visual acuity, many electronic test charts have been validated for use by practitioners. Research into self-administered visual acuity measures remains limited. The absence of a comprehensive evidence base for teleoptometry limits ECPs, particularly during this pandemic. Knowledge gaps ought to be addressed to facilitate development of optometry specific evidence-based guidance for telecare. In particular, advances in ocular self-imaging could help move this field forwards.

Remote monitoring of clubfoot treatment with digital photographs in low resource settings: Is it accurate?

Background

Clinical examination and functional assessment are often the first steps to assess outcome of clubfoot treatment. Clinical photographs may be an adjunct used to assess treatment outcomes in lower resourced settings where physical review by a specialist is limited. We aimed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of photographic images of patients with clubfoot in assessing outcome following treatment.

Methods

In this single-centre diagnostic accuracy study, we included all children with clubfoot from a cohort treated between 2011 and 2013, in 2017. Two physiotherapists trained in clubfoot management calculated the Assessing Clubfoot Treatment (ACT) score for each child to decide if treatment was successful or if further treatment was required. Photographic images were then taken of 79 feet. Two blinded orthopaedic surgeons assessed three sets of images of each foot (n = 237 in total) at two time points (two months apart). Treatment for each foot was rated as ‘success’, ‘borderline’ or ‘failure’. Intra- and inter-observer variation for the photographic image was assessed. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values were calculated for the photographic image compared to the ACT score.

Results

There was perfect correlation between clinical assessment and photographic evaluation of both raters at both time-points in 38 (48%) feet. The raters demonstrated acceptable reliability with re-scoring photographs (rater 1, k = 0.55; rater 2, k = 0.88). Thirty percent (n = 71) of photographs were assessed as poor quality image or sub-optimal patient position. Sensitivity of outcome with photograph compared to ACT score was 83.3%–88.3% and specificity ranged from 57.9%–73.3%.

Conclusion

Digital photography may help to confirm, but not exclude, success of clubfoot treatment. Future work to establish photographic parameters as an adjunct to assessing treatment outcomes, and guidance on a standardised protocol for photographs, may be beneficial in the follow up of children who have treated clubfoot in isolated communities or lower resourced settings.