Commentary: Teleophthalmology and electronic medical records: Weighing the pros and cons of unavoidable progress

Fundoscopy Use in Neurology Departments and the Utility of Smartphone photography ( FUNDUS ): A prospective prevalence and crossover diagnostic accuracy study amongst neurology inpatients

Background and purpose

Although fundoscopy is a crucial part of the neurological examination, it is challenging, under‐utilized and unreliably performed. The aim was to determine the prevalence of fundus pathology amongst neurology inpatients and the diagnostic accuracy of current fundoscopy practice compared with systematic screening with smartphone fundoscopy (SF) and portable non‐mydriatic fundus photography (NMFP).

Methods

This was a prospective cross‐sectional surveillance and diagnostic accuracy study on adult patients admitted under neurology in an Australian hospital. Inpatients were randomized to initial NMFP (RetinaVue 100, Welch Allyn) or SF (D‐EYE) followed by a crossover to the alternative modality. Images were graded by neurology doctors, using telemedicine consensus neuro‐ophthalmology NMFP grading as the reference standard. Feasibility parameters included ease, comfort and speed.

Results

Of 79 enrolled patients, 14.1% had neurologically relevant pathology (seven, disc pallor; one, hypertensive retinopathy; three, disc swelling). The neurology team performed direct ophthalmoscopy in 6.6% of cases and missed all abnormalities. SF had a sensitivity of 30%–40% compared with NMFP (45.5%); however, it had a lower rate of screening failure (1% vs. 13%, p < 0.001), a shorter examination time (1.10 vs. 2.25 min, p < 0.001) and a slightly higher patient comfort rating (9.2 vs. 8/10, p < 0.001).

Conclusion

Our study demonstrates a clinically significant prevalence of fundus pathology amongst neurology inpatients which was missed by current fundoscopy practices. Portable NMFP screening appears more accurate than SF, whilst both are diagnostically superior to routine fundoscopic practice, feasible and well tolerated by patients.

Assessing the Utility and Patient Satisfaction of Virtual Retina Clinics During COVID-19 Pandemic

PURPOSE

To explore whether the virtual retina clinic (VRC) has been a useful and safe platform for monitoring retinal diseases during the COVID-19 pandemic and assessing patient satisfaction.

METHODS

A prospective observational study was conducted for patients with stable retinal diseases in Donostia University Hospital's Ophthalmology Service during the pandemic. All patients were assessed in the VRC with optical coherence tomography of the macula and widefield retinography, plus visual field tests in hydroxychloroquine retinopathy screenings. The VRC´s effectiveness was evaluated with repeat blind assessments and patient satisfaction with an adapted SERVQUAL scale.

RESULTS

The most common diseases were diabetic retinopathy (30.3%) and age-related macular degeneration (21.8%). Most patients (74%) were eligible to continue in the VRC, 19.3% were referred to face-to-face (F2F) appointments and 6.6% were discharged. Patients underwent repeat blind assessments in F2F appointments to monitor VRC performance in 23.7% of the cases. The sensitivity to detect disease progression was 100%. The specificity was 80.1%. The VRC took half the time. The patient overall satisfaction rating was 9.8/10.

CONCLUSION

The VRC, as an additional platform, supports F2F appointments. Almost three-quarters of patients could continue being safely seen in the VRC. The virtual approach decreases SARS-CoV-2 exposure. Patient satisfaction is very good.

TRANSLATIONAL RELEVANCE

The VRC enables us to attend patients safely with decreased SARS-CoV-2 exposure.