Gobeille Micaela R, Malkin Alexis G, Jamara Richard, Ross Nicole C
New England College of Optometry, Boston, Massachusetts *
Optom Vis Sci. 2018 Sep;95(9):859-864. doi: 10.1097/OPX.0000000000001267.
Device utilization and abandonment for patients seen on a mobile clinic are explored. Findings are informative for resource allocation in a novel low vision rehabilitation (LVR) delivery model. This study also explores the relationships between device abandonment and LVR patient-reported functional outcomes.
This prospective cohort study investigated low vision device utilization and abandonment in a novel mobile clinic delivery model.
A device abandonment questionnaire was administered by telephone 3 months and 1 year after mobile clinic LVR. Participants (n = 65) had previously met the U.S. definition of legal blindness and were prescribed a total of 154 devices at their low vision consultative visits. Trends in device utilization and correlations with clinical and demographic participant characteristics, as well as functional outcomes as assessed by Massof Activity Inventory, are explored.
An average of 2.6 device recommendations were made per participant. Digital magnification, optical magnifiers, and filters were most frequently recommended. At 3 months, 29% of participants abandoned at least one device, although only 17% of received devices were abandoned. There was no significant difference in the number of devices used, abandoned, or not received at 3 months versus 1 year after LVR. Devices prescribed for reading goals were most frequently used and least often abandoned, whereas glare control and distance magnification devices were more frequently abandoned. Neither patient characteristics nor Massof Activity Inventory change score was predictive of device abandonment. There was no significant difference in the odds of device abandonment in comparison with a previous study that assessed academic outpatient LVR clinics using the same questionnaire.
Although more device recommendations are given per patient on the mobile clinic, there is no significant difference in device abandonment for patients seen on the mobile clinic versus other outpatient LVR delivery models.
探讨了移动诊所中患者对设备的使用情况及设备遗弃情况。研究结果为新型低视力康复(LVR)服务模式下的资源分配提供了参考信息。本研究还探讨了设备遗弃与LVR患者报告的功能结局之间的关系。
这项前瞻性队列研究调查了新型移动诊所服务模式下低视力设备的使用情况及遗弃情况。
在移动诊所进行LVR后的3个月和1年通过电话发放设备遗弃调查问卷。参与者(n = 65)先前符合美国法定失明的定义,在低视力咨询就诊时共被开具了154台设备。探讨了设备使用趋势以及与参与者临床和人口统计学特征的相关性,以及通过马索夫活动量表评估的功能结局。
每位参与者平均收到2.6项设备推荐。数字放大镜、光学放大镜和滤光器是最常被推荐的。在3个月时,29%的参与者遗弃了至少一台设备,尽管仅17%的已收到设备被遗弃。LVR后3个月与1年时,使用、遗弃或未收到的设备数量没有显著差异。为阅读目标开具的设备使用最频繁且遗弃最少,而眩光控制和远距离放大设备则更常被遗弃。患者特征和马索夫活动量表变化评分均不能预测设备遗弃情况。与之前一项使用相同问卷评估学术门诊LVR诊所的研究相比,设备遗弃几率没有显著差异。
尽管移动诊所每位患者收到的设备推荐更多,但与其他门诊LVR服务模式相比,移动诊所患者的设备遗弃情况没有显著差异。