Skip to main content
main-content

01.12.2017 | Research article | Ausgabe 1/2017 Open Access

BMC Ophthalmology 1/2017

Mapping standard ophthalmic outcome sets to metrics currently reported in eight eye hospitals

Zeitschrift:
BMC Ophthalmology > Ausgabe 1/2017
Autoren:
Monica Michelotti, Dirk F. de Korne, Jennifer S. Weizer, Paul P. Lee, Declan Flanagan, Simon P. Kelly, Anne Odergren, Sukhpal S. Sandhu, Charity Wai, Niek Klazinga, Aravind Haripriya, Joshua D. Stein, Melanie Hingorani
Wichtige Hinweise

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi: 10.​1186/​s12886-017-0667-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Abstract

Background

To determine alignment of proposed international standard outcomes sets for ophthalmic conditions to metrics currently reported by eye hospitals.

Methods

Mixed methods comparative benchmark study, including eight eye hospitals in Australia, India, Singapore, Sweden, U.K., and U.S. All are major international tertiary care and training centers in ophthalmology. Main outcome measure is consistency of ophthalmic outcomes measures reported.

Results

International agreed standard outcomes (ICHOM) sets are available for cataract surgery (10 metrics) and macular degeneration (7 metrics). The eight hospitals reported 22 different metrics for cataract surgery and 2 for macular degeneration, which showed only limited overlap with the proposed ICHOM metrics. None of the hospitals reported patient reported visual functioning or vision-related quality of life outcomes measures (PROMs). Three hospitals (38%) reported rates for uncomplicated cataract surgeries only. There was marked variation in how and at what point postoperatively visual outcomes following cataract, cornea, glaucoma, strabismus and oculoplastics procedures were reported. Seven (87.5%) measured post-operative infections and four (50%) measured 30 day unplanned reoperation rates.

Conclusions

Outcomes reporting for ophthalmic conditions currently widely varies across hospitals internationally and does not include patient-reported outcomes. Reaching consensus on measures and consistency in data collection will allow meaningful comparisons and provide an evidence base enabling improved sharing of “best practices” to improve eye care globally. Implementation of international standards is still a major challenge and practice-based knowledge on measures should be one of the inputs of the international standardization process.
Zusatzmaterial
Literatur
Über diesen Artikel

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 1/2017

BMC Ophthalmology 1/2017 Zur Ausgabe

Neu im Fachgebiet Augenheilkunde

29.01.2020 | DFP-Fortbildung | Ausgabe 1/2020

„White-dot-Syndrome“

Grundlagen, Diagnostik und Therapie

08.01.2020 | Erkrankungen der Hornhaut | CME | Ausgabe 1/2020

Anteriore virale Uveitis

Klinik, diagnostisches Vorgehen und Behandlungsoptionen