We report an evaluation of the British Ophthalmological Surveillance Unit (BOSU), a nationwide active surveillance scheme to assist with the case ascertainment of rare eye conditions. The evaluation assessed participation rates, study applications and research outputs. In addition, through an anonymous postal survey we ascertained the opinions of ophthalmologists regarding the usefulness, levels of feedback, barriers to participation and levels of case ascertainment. Over the first 3 years, the 4-month mean participation rate has improved from 58% to 71%. Ten studies have used this system for case ascertainment. To date three journal publications and 10 conference presentations have reported findings from these studies. It was observed that 582/870 (68%) questionnaires were returned by ophthalmologists, of whom 95% considered BOSU as very or quite useful. In all, 71% reported overall feedback to be sufficient. However, 34% requested greater feedback from research groups. Reported barriers to effective participation were 'having to remember the patient's identity' (52%) and paying for return postage of cards (22%). However, 72% of respondents did not consider the work involved in reporting a case to be prohibitive. Self-reported levels of case ascertainment by ophthalmologists for completed studies ranged between 72% and 95%. This population-based surveillance system provides an effective method for prospective case identification and subsequent data collection. It enables the study of sufficiently representative samples to allow meaningful epidemiological analysis and avoid bias. Its success relies upon the high level of support that it currently receives from ophthalmologists.
Aims To estimate the incidence of acuteonset presumed infectious endophthalmitis (PIE) following cataract surgery in the UK and provide epidemiological data on the presentation, management, microbiology, and outcome of cases of endophthalmitis. Methods Cases were identified prospectively by active surveillance through the British Ophthalmological Surveillance Unit reporting card system, for the 12-month period October 1999 to September 2000 inclusive. Questionnaire data were obtained from ophthalmologists throughout the UK at baseline and 6 months after diagnosis. Under-reporting was estimated by independently contacting units with infection databases. Results Data were available on 213 patients at baseline and 201 patients at follow-up. The minimum estimated incidence of PIE was 0.086 per 100 cataract extractions and the corrected incidence was 0.14 per 100 cataract extractions. For the management of PIE, 96% of patients received intravitreal, 30% subconjunctival, 65% oral, and 17% intravenous antibiotics. In all, 17% of patients received intravitreal steroid. From the intraocular samples taken for microbiological analysis, 56% were culture positive. At followup, 48% of patients achieved visual acuity of 6/ 12 or better and 66% achieved better than 6/60. 13% of patients were unable to perceive light or had evisceration of the globe. Conclusions The incidence of PIE after cataract surgery in the UK is comparable to that of other studies. Approximately 50% of patients achieved a visual acuity close to the driving standard.
Purpose To describe the incidence, features, management, and risk factors of postintravitreal anti-VEGF endophthalmitis (PIAE) in patients undergoing treatment for exudative age-related macular degeneration in the United Kingdom. Methods Prospective observational case control study. Forty-seven cases of PIAE were identified through the British Ophthalmological
Aims The aim of this study is to provide epidemiological data on the incidence, aetiology, management, and visual outcome in traumatic optic neuropathy (TON) in the UK. Methods Patients with TON were identified prospectively by population-based active surveillance through the British Ophthalmic Surveillance Unit over a 2-year period with data obtained from an incident questionnaire and follow-up questionnaire sent to positive reporters. Results Incident and follow-up data were available on 121 and 97 (80%) patients, respectively. The minimum estimated incidence was 1.005 per million. Leading causes included falls (25.6%), road traffic accidents (RTAs) (21.5%), and assaults (20.7%). The median age was 31 years. There were 95 (78.5%) men. Presenting visual acuity (VA) was 6/60 or worse in 85 (70%) patients, with 43 patients (36%) with no perception of light. Associated injuries included 47 (39%) orbital wall fractures, 37 (31%) closed globe injuries, 23 (19%) ocular adnexal injuries, 23 (19%) skull fractures, and 18 (16%) intracranial bleeding. Sixty-five percent (75/116) received no acute treatment and 35% (41/116) received steroids and/or surgery. Of the treated group, 24% (8/ 33) and of the untreated group 20% (11/56) improved three lines or more of VA (P ¼ 0.61). Prompt ophthalmic examination (P ¼ 0.002), orbital fracture (P ¼ 0.046), high Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score (P ¼ 0.023), and poor initial VA (P ¼ 0.009) were associated with increased likelihood of treatment. Poor initial VA (Po0.001), orbital fracture (P ¼ 0.004), and significant head injury (P ¼ 0.038) were associated with poor visual outcome. Conclusions This study suggested that young men were at greatest risk of TON. We detected a trend towards conservative management of this condition in the UK. TON was associated with significant ocular, orbital, and head injuries that highlighted the need for multidisciplinary management.
Purpose To determine the frequency of patients suffering harm due to delay in ophthalmic care in the UK over a 12-month period. Methods Patients with deterioration in vision in at least one eye of 3 lines of Snellen acuity or 15 letters on ETDRS chart or deterioration in visual field deviation of 3 decibels due to health service initiated delay in review or care were ascertained through the BOSU using prospective active surveillance involving all UK consultant ophthalmologists. Demographic details, diagnosis, cause and length of delay, and vision loss were then sought by questionnaire. Results 238 cases reported between March 2015 and February 2016. 197/238 questionnaires were returned (83%). Twentyeight reports were out of the study period or did not meet the case definition. Median age was 76 years (range: 1 to 98 years). Median delay was 22 weeks (range: 2 days to 5½ years). Seventy two per cent experienced permanent reduction in visual acuity, 23% permanent deterioration in visual field. Main diagnoses were Glaucoma 42%, Age-related Macular Degeneration (AMD) 23%, and Diabetic Retinopathy (DR) 16%. Eighteen patients were eligible for Severely Sight Impaired (SSI) or Sight Impaired (SI) registration. Main causes were delayed follow-up (76%), lost referral (7%), and delayed treatment (8%). Conclusion Patients are suffering preventable harm due to health service initiated delay leading to permanently reduced vision. This is occurring in patients of all ages, but most consistently in those with chronic conditions. Delayed follow-up or review is the cause in the majority of cases indicating a lack of capacity within the hospital eye service.
This population-based prospective study confirms OSC as a rare cancer in the UK. Masquerade syndromes result in significant diagnostic delays and increase the risk of pagetoid tumour spread. There is considerable UK variation in pathological and surgical management, and ocular reconstruction and radical surgery is often required for OSC due to delayed presentation.
PNF is a rare, dangerous condition. This study identified an incidence of 0.24 per 1,000,000 per annum in the UK. β-haemolytic Streptococcus A is the most common causative organism. Mortality remains a potential outcome, and survivors suffer significant morbidity. Early intravenous antibiotic management with a consensus favouring penicillin and clindamycin combined with debridement.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
334 Leonard St
Brooklyn, NY 11211
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.