Comparison of eyecare utilization at two service delivery levels during the COVID-19 pandemic as a measure of their impact: A multicentric retrospective analysis across four North Indian high-volume eyecare organizations

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to assess the performance of the tertiary centers (TCS) and vision centers (VCs) of the four organizations participating in this research, once the lockdown was lifted, and to compare it with the performance during the same period of the previous year. Methods: This was a cross-sectional study assessing eyecare utilization in the first 2 months after resumption of services post the lockdown in 2020 and comparing that across the same time period in 2019. Anonymized data containing basic demographic details, proportions of patient visits and their reasons, as well as referral information was collected. The drop percentage method was used, and P values were calculated using paired t -tests. Results: Four TCs and 60 VCs were included. Overall, outpatient attendance dipped 51.2% at TCs and 27.5% at VCs, across the 2 years. At both levels of care delivery, the percentage drop in females was more than that in males; however, the overall drop at VCs was less than that at TCs, for both sexes. Eyecare utilization in pediatric populations dropped significantly more than in adult populations, across the overall sample. There was no significant change in referrals for refractive error as a proportion of total outpatients, although there was a significant decline in the same for cataract and specialty treatment. Conclusion: VCs are valuable and successful model for eyecare delivery especially in the continued aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Harnessing Generalizable Real-World Ophthalmic Big Data: Descriptive Analysis of the Bodhya Eye Consortium Model for Collaborative Research

“…Furthermore, the use of proforma driven data recorded during consultations meant that although this was a retrospective study, the low (2%) patient exclusion rates, made the research valuable in the field, subverting the need for techniques to overcome data "missingness" [25]. Currently, there are almost thirty more studies underway, at various stages of the writing and submission process, with six already published, and two more accepted [11][12][13][14][15][16]. While at present the consortium is in a nascent stage and the impact of its research is being measured primarily thorugh publications, in the medium to long term, as we grow more impactful in terms of health policy and behaviour, we will expand our considerations to not only include impact factors but also other relevant factors.…”

“…Authors: Ishaana Sood, 1,13 Shalinder Sabherwal, 2,13 Umang Mathur, 3,13 Elesh Jain, 4,13 Madhu Bhadauria, 5,13 Deepshikha Agrawal, 6,13 Ashi Khurana, 7,13 Vikas Mittal, 8,13 Avinash Mahindrakar, 9,13 Vishal Govindahari, 10,13 Sucheta Kulkarni, 11,13 Ken K. Nischal 12,13 Affiliations:…”

“…The data that needed to excluded because of quality was less than 2%. Since then the collaborative efforts have led to the successful completion of various research projects based on retrospective and prospectively collected data: a further eight peer-reviewed studies have been published or accepted by international and national journals [11][12][13][14][15][16]. At present the consortium's research effectiveness is measured through its ability to publish such high-quality research.…”