These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Low-vision service provision by optometrists: a Canadian nationwide survey.
    Author: Lam N, Leat SJ, Leung A.
    Journal: Optom Vis Sci; 2015 Mar; 92(3):365-74. PubMed ID: 25599339.
    Abstract:
    PURPOSE: To document the degree to which Canadian optometrists are involved in the provision of low-vision (LV) care and their referral patterns. To investigate the barriers to providing optometric low-vision services (LVS). METHODS: Practicing optometrists across Canada were randomly sampled and invited to participate in a questionnaire that included questions on personal profile, primary practice profile, levels of LV care offered, patterns of referral, and barriers to provision of LV care. Questions included a combination of multiple choice and open-ended formats, and included hypothetical cases. RESULTS: A total of 459 optometrists responded (response rate, 24.8%). Optometrists estimated that 1% (range, 0 to 100%) of their patients were LV patients yet also estimated that 10% of their patients had acuity equal to or worse than 20/40. Thirty-five percent of respondents indicated that their primary practice offered LV care, 75.6% would manage a patient with minimum disability and simple goals themselves, whereas 10.7% would manage a patient with more than minimal visual disability who needed more specialized LV devices (e.g., telescopes, electronic aids, and custom-designed microscopes); 84.3% of optometrists would assess for basic magnification and lighting in a hypothetical patient with early age-related macular degeneration, whereas 15% would undertake full LV rehabilitation in advanced age-related macular degeneration. Optometrists commonly referred to CNIB (formerly the Canadian National Institute for the Blind), yet only 10.7% of respondents almost always received a written report after referral. Those who would not undertake LV assessment stated that they lacked the knowledge, equipment, or experience; that LV assessment is too time consuming; and that the cost is too prohibitive. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first comprehensive study of LVS provision by optometrists in Canada. In order for optometrists to become more involved in LVS, there is a need for more LV education, provincial health coverage of optometric LVS, and better collaboration communication between LV providers.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]