Raised intraocular pressure: an alternative method of referral.

Kljakovic, Marjan; Howie, J. G. R.; Phillips, C I; Bartholomew, R S; Brown, Jamie

doi:10.1136/bmj.290.6474.1043

Cited by 4 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There is evidence that referral by optometrists is effective (MacKean and Elkington, 1982;Kljakovic et al, 1985;Gilbert et al, 1982;Burns-Cox and Dean Hart, 1985). Steinman (1982) reported that referral by optometrists and ophthalmic medical practitioners for openangle glaucoma is correct in around 88% of cases.…”

Section: Referrals and Notifications By British Optometrists: M J mentioning

confidence: 99%

Referrals and notifications by British optometrists

Port

Pope

1988

Ophthalmic Physiologic Optic

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

1031 British optometrists completed a questionnaire to give information on their rates of referral and notification to the medical profession. Data were collected in relation to the conditions concerned, the age and sex of the patient, and the spectacle correction. Major causes of referral were cataract, glaucoma, fundus changes, headaches/migraine/eye pain and lowered visual acuity; 6.5% of all patients seen were referred to their general medical practitioner notified, and of this group it was estimated that 25-30% could have managed with reading glasses which comprised spherical lenses of equal power. If such glasses could be self-selected, without reference to a medical practitioner or optometrist, a significant number of people would not benefit from the health screening aspects of the eye examination.

show abstract

Section: Referrals and Notifications By British Optometrists: M J mentioning

confidence: 99%

Referrals and notifications by British optometrists

Port

Pope

1988

Ophthalmic Physiologic Optic

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Cardiac Rehabilitation: Gender Differences in Factors Influencing Participation

Lieberman¹,

Meana²,

Stewart³

1998

Journal of Women's Health

122

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study investigates gender differences in the barriers and incentives that are most influential in the coronary patient's decision to participate in cardiac rehabilitation programs (CRPs) and suggests strategies to counter these barriers. Patient surveys were administered to consecutive English-speaking attenders and referred nonattenders to a cardiac rehabilitation center at a university healthcare system in Toronto, Canada. A survey questionnaire, constructed from a literature review and advice from key informants, examined potential factors affecting decisions to engage in CRPs. One hundred twenty-nine attenders at a CRP and 61 referred nonattenders completed the questionnaire. Physician recommendation was reported to be the most important factor influencing both women's and men's decisions to participate in CRPs, followed by encouragement from family members. For women who had attended CRP, encouragement from their adult children was significantly more influential than it was for men. Attention to health promotion was also a significantly more powerful motivator for women than it was for men. For CRP nonattenders, concomitant illness, transportation problems, and inconvenient timing of the program were stated to be the three most important barriers to CRP participation in both sexes, although women rated concomitant illness as a significantly more powerful barrier than did men. The decision to participate in CRPs involves several factors, some of which are different or more important for women. As physician recommendations continue to be the single most important factor in motivating both men and women to attend, strengthened and increased physician endorsement will likely encourage higher levels of participation in CRPs. For women, permission should be sought to discuss the advantages of CRPs with adult children who are apparently influential in the decision. As women nonattenders are more concerned than men about the effects of concomitant illnesses, reassurance should be provided about customized programs and exercise targets that consider the needs and limitations of individuals with other health conditions.

show abstract