Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science Cover Image for Volume 65, Issue 7
June 2024
Volume 65, Issue 7
Open Access
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   June 2024
Assessing the effectiveness of a mailed contrast sensitivity test in prioritizing patients on cataract waiting lists.
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Mehal Rathore
    Optometry and Visual Sciences, City University of London, London, London, United Kingdom
  • Eleonora Bianchi
    Glaucoma Services, Royal Surrey NHS Foundation Trust, Guildford, Surrey, United Kingdom
  • Peter Reddingius
    Optometry and Visual Sciences, City University of London, London, London, United Kingdom
  • Dan Lindfield
    Glaucoma Services, Royal Surrey NHS Foundation Trust, Guildford, Surrey, United Kingdom
  • David P Crabb
    Optometry and Visual Sciences, City University of London, London, London, United Kingdom
  • Pete Jones
    Optometry and Visual Sciences, City University of London, London, London, United Kingdom
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships   Mehal Rathore None; Eleonora Bianchi None; Peter Reddingius None; Dan Lindfield Allergan/Abbvie, Alcon, Sight Sciences, Ellios, Vision Engineering, Glaukos, Santen, Medicom, EndoOptiks, Spectrum, Thea, Code C (Consultant/Contractor); David Crabb AbbVie/Allergan; Apellis; Janssen, Code C (Consultant/Contractor), AbbVie/Allergan; Apellis; Santen, Code F (Financial Support), AbbVie/Allergan; Santen; Thea; Glaukos, Code R (Recipient); Pete Jones None
  • Footnotes
    Support  Marie Sklodowska-Curie grant agreement No 955590
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science June 2024, Vol.65, 6406. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Mehal Rathore, Eleonora Bianchi, Peter Reddingius, Dan Lindfield, David P Crabb, Pete Jones; Assessing the effectiveness of a mailed contrast sensitivity test in prioritizing patients on cataract waiting lists.. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2024;65(7):6406.

      Download citation file:


      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Purpose : Prioritizing the most urgent cases in cataract waiting lists requires practical, economical solutions. In this study, we investigate the feasibility of using a mail-delivered, pen-and-paper contrast sensitivity (CS) test to potentially flag eyes that require surgery.

Methods : The SpotChecks TM CS test (Figure 1[A] and [B]) was mailed to patients (n=233) waiting for their cataract assessment, along with a prepaid return envelope (cross-sectional study). Response rates were tabulated (stratified by age, sex, and socioeconomic status), and test scores were analysed to determine how well the home-tests predicted which eyes were referred for surgery. A subset of these patients (n=39) underwent in-person follow-up testing to verify the accuracy of the home data.

Results : Forty-six per cent of patients responded (n=108). No notable differences were noted between respondents and non-respondents, either in terms of age, sex, geographic location, or socioeconomic status (all p > 0.05, Figure 2[A],[B],[C], and [D]). The home-test CS scores had an AUROC {± CI 95%} of 0.69 {0.61 – 0.76} for predicting which eyes were later listed for surgery. Machine learning was used to combine CS scores with the patient’s visual acuity (extracted from the patient’s medical record) to further improve the prediction (AUROC {± CI 95%} = 0.77 {0.70 – 0.83}). Follow-up testing in a subset of patients (n=39) indicated home CS scores correlated with other clinical measurements including biometry signal-to-noise ratio (p = 0.032), LogMAR acuity, and Pelli-Robson CS (all p < 0.001).

Conclusions : Mailing patients pen-and-paper CS tests may be a feasible, “low-tech” way of helping assign priority to patients on cataract waiting lists.

This abstract was presented at the 2024 ARVO Annual Meeting, held in Seattle, WA, May 5-9, 2024.

 

Figure 1:(A) Contents of the test pack mailed to each patient (B) Close-up of the SpotChecks test, including the circular targets that the user must circle or tick

Figure 1:(A) Contents of the test pack mailed to each patient (B) Close-up of the SpotChecks test, including the circular targets that the user must circle or tick

 

Figure 2: Demographic data for respondents (green) and non-respondents (red). In each panel, response rates are shown as a function of (A) age; (B) sex; (C) geographic location (black square indicates the location of the hospital); (D) IMD (a surrogate measure of socio-economic status, 1 = most deprived; 32844 = least deprived).

Figure 2: Demographic data for respondents (green) and non-respondents (red). In each panel, response rates are shown as a function of (A) age; (B) sex; (C) geographic location (black square indicates the location of the hospital); (D) IMD (a surrogate measure of socio-economic status, 1 = most deprived; 32844 = least deprived).

×
×

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.

×