Eyes with PDR that received only intravitreal anti-VEGF demonstrated worse anatomic and functional outcomes after being LTFU compared with eyes that received PRP. Given the potential sequelae of being LTFU, the choice of treatment for PDR must be considered carefully.

IMPORTANCE Loss to follow-up (LTFU) after anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) injections increases the risk of vision loss among patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD). OBJECTIVE To report rates of LTFU among patients with nAMD after anti-VEGF injections and to identify risk factors associated with LTFU in this population. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTSThis retrospective cohort study of data from 9007 patients who received anti-VEGF injections for treatment of nAMD was performed at an urban, private retina practice with multiple locations from April 1, 2012, to January 12, 2016. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURESRates of LTFU after anti-VEGF injections. Loss to follow-up was defined as receipt of 1 or more injections with no subsequent follow-up visit within 12 months. RESULTS Amongthe 9007 patients (mean [SD] age, 81.2 [8.8] years; 5917 [65.7%] female; 7905 [87.8%] white), 2003 (22.2%) were LTFU. Odds of LTFU were greater among patients 81 to 85 years of age (odds ratio [OR], 1.58; 95% CI, 1.38-1.82; P < .001), 86 to 90 years of age (OR, 2.29; 95% CI, 2.00-2.62; P < .001), and more than 90 years of age (OR, 3.31; 95% CI, 2.83-3.86; P < .001) compared with patients 80 years of age and younger. Odds of LTFU among African American patients (OR, 1.47; 95% CI, 1.00-2.16; P = .05), Asian patients (OR, 2.63; 95% CI, 1.71-4.03; P < .001), patients of other race (OR, 3.

No abstract

No abstract

Purpose of review The aim of this study was to report characteristics of patients presenting with serious ocular injuries during the COVID-19 stay-at-home orders. Recent findings Of 1058 patients presenting for emergency evaluation during the stay-at-home order, 62 (5.9%) patients [mean (SD) age, 41.1 (19.2) years; 19 (31%) women; 31 (50%) white] presented with severe ocular trauma. The daily mean (SD) number of patients who presented for emergency evaluation decreased from 49.0 (9) to 36.4 (6) during the quarantine (P < 0.001). Patients presenting during the stay-at-home order were less likely to have health insurance [odds ratio (OR), 0.33; 95% confidence interval (95% CI), 0.13–0.90, P = 0.024], more likely to have a delayed presentation (difference, 22.7 h, 95% CI, 5.8–39.5, P < 0.001, more likely to travel farther to seek emergency care (difference, 10.4 miles, 95% CI, 2.6–18.2, P < 0.001) and more likely to have an injury occur at home (OR, 22.8; 95% CI, 9.6–54.2, P < 0.001). Of injuries occurring at home, there was a significant increase in injuries arising from home improvement projects during the stay-at-home order (28 vs. 0%, P = 0.02). Summary During the COVID-19 pandemic, patients with ocular trauma were more likely to have injuries sustained at home and have additional barriers to care. These changes underscore a need for targeted interventions to optimize emergent eye care during a pandemic.