The effectiveness of community vs. hospital eye service follow-up for patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration with controlled disease

Conditions

Wet age-related macular degeneration (AMD) Eye Diseases Degeneration of macula and posterior pole

Mara Violato, Helen Dakin, Usha Chakravarthy, Barnaby C Reeves, Tünde Pető et al. (14 authors)

BMJ Open2016-10-0112 citations

10.1136/bmjopen-2016-011121

The Effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and acceptability of Community versus Hospital Eye Service follow-up for patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration with quiescent disease (ECHoES): a virtual randomised balanced incomplete block trial.

Reeves BC, Scott LJ, Taylor J, Hogg R, Rogers CA, Wordsworth S, Townsend D, Muldrew A, Peto T, Violato M, Dakin H, Cappel-Porter H, Mills N, O'Reilly D, Harding SP, Chakravarthy U.

2016-10-0111 citations

10.3310/hta20800

Effectiveness of Community versus Hospital Eye Service follow-up for patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration with quiescent disease (ECHoES): a virtual non-inferiority trial

Barnaby C Reeves, Lauren J Scott, Jodi Taylor, Simon Harding, Tünde Pető et al. (12 authors)

BMJ Open2016-07-0117 citations

10.1136/bmjopen-2015-010685

Health professionals’ and service users’ perspectives of shared care for monitoring wet age-related macular degeneration: a qualitative study alongside the ECHoES trial

Daisy Townsend, Barnaby C Reeves, Jodi Taylor, Usha Chakravarthy, Dermot O’Reilly et al. (7 authors)

BMJ Open2015-04-0124 citations

10.1136/bmjopen-2014-007400

Interventions

The intervention of interest is retreatment decision making by community optometrists. The comparator is retreatment decision making by hospital ophthalmologists. Ophthalmologists and optometrists

Eligibility

Sex/Gender

All

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: Hospital ophthalmologists and community optometrists will be recruited. Ophthalmologists and Optometrists will be contacted by email. Expressions of interest will be sought. There are no specific requirements for eligibility to participate other than willingness to attend specified training sessions and completion of a test of competency following the training session. In the event of more than the desired numbers applying to take part in the study, we will allocate participation status on a first come first served basis.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: Inability to complete training successfully including: 1. Attendance in person or via the web for training seminars and 2. Satisfactory performance on a training set of vignettes

Design outcomes

Primary

Measure	Time frame
Participant's judgement of the need for retreatment ('Lesion reactivation, referral to hospital' vs. 'Inactive lesion, optometry review in 4 weeks' or 'Suspicious lesion, optometry review with new images in 2 weeks') compared to the reference classification. The primary outcome for the economic evaluation will be the cost per accurate retreatment decision.	—

Secondary

Measure	Time frame
Secondary outcomes are: 1. Frequency of 'critical' errors judged likely to be sight-threatening, i.e. lesions that need urgent retreatment to avoid irrecoverable loss of visual acuity. 2. Judgements about the presence or absence of lesion components, i.e.: blood, exudates and subretinal fluid (SRF) in the fundus colour images; SRF, intra-retinal fluid/cysts and pigment epithelial detachment (PED) in the Optical coherence tomography (OCT) images. 3. Participant-rated confidence in the decision about the primary outcome, on a 5-point scale.	—

Measure

Time frame

Secondary outcomes are: 1. Frequency of 'critical' errors judged likely to be sight-threatening, i.e. lesions that need urgent retreatment to avoid irrecoverable loss of visual acuity. 2. Judgements about the presence or absence of lesion components, i.e.: blood, exudates and subretinal fluid (SRF) in the fundus colour images; SRF, intra-retinal fluid/cysts and pigment epithelial detachment (PED) in the Optical coherence tomography (OCT) images. 3. Participant-rated confidence in the decision about the primary outcome, on a 5-point scale.

—

Countries

United Kingdom

Outcome results

None listed