Indicators for Assessing the Quality of Refractive Error Care

被引:9
|
作者
Lee, Ling [1 ,2 ]
Burnett, Anthea M. [1 ,2 ]
D'Esposito, Fabrizio [3 ]
Fricke, Tim [1 ]
Nguyen, Long Tien [4 ]
Vuong, Duong Anh [5 ]
Nguyen, Hien Thi Thu [6 ]
Yu, Mitasha [1 ]
Nguyen, Ngoc Viet My [4 ]
Huynh, Ly Phuong [7 ]
Ho, Suit May [1 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Brien Holden Vis Inst, Sydney, NSW, Australia
[2] Univ New South Wales, Sch Optometry & Vis Sci, Sydney, NSW, Australia
[3] Fred Hollows Fdn, Melbourne, Vic, Australia
[4] Fred Hollows Fdn Vietnam, Da Nang, Vietnam
[5] Minist Hlth, Med Serv Adm, Hanoi, Vietnam
[6] Vietnam Natl Inst Ophthalmol, Hanoi, Vietnam
[7] Brien Holden Vis Inst, Hanoi, Vietnam
关键词
The Fred Hollows Foundation;
D O I
10.1097/OPX.0000000000001629
中图分类号
R77 [眼科学];
学科分类号
100212 ;
摘要
SIGNIFICANCE Quality refractive error care is essential for reducing vision impairment. Quality indicators and standardized approaches for assessing the quality of refractive error care need to be established. PURPOSE This study aimed to develop a set of indicators for assessing the quality of refractive error care and test their applicability in a real-world setting using unannounced standardized patients (USPs). METHODS Patient outcomes and three quality of refractive error care (Q.REC) indicators (1, optimally prescribed spectacles; 2, adequately prescribed spectacles; 3, vector dioptric distance) were developed using existing literature, refraction training standards, and consulting educators. Twenty-one USPs with various refractive errors were trained to visit optical stores across Vietnam to have a refraction, observe techniques, and order spectacles. Spectacles were assessed against each Q.REC indicator and tested for associations with vision and comfort. RESULTS Overall, 44.1% (184/417) of spectacles provided good vision and comfort. Of the spectacles that met Q.REC indicators 1 and 2, 62.5 and 54.9%, respectively, provided both good vision and comfort. Optimally prescribed spectacles (indicator 1) were significantly more likely to provide good vision and comfort independently compared with spectacles that did not meet any indicator (good vision: 94.6 vs. 85.0%, P = .01; comfortable: 66.1 vs. 36.3%, P < .01). Adequately prescribed spectacles (indicator 2) were more likely to provide good comfort compared with spectacles not meeting any indicator (57.7 vs. 36.3%, P < .01); however, vision outcomes were not significantly different (85.9 vs. 85.0%, P = .90). Good vision was associated with a lower mean vector dioptric distance (P < .01) but not with comfort (P = .52). CONCLUSIONS The optimally prescribed spectacles indicator is a promising approach for assessing the quality of refractive error care without additional assessments of vision and comfort. Using USPs is a practical approach and could be used as a standardized method for evaluating the quality of refractive error care.
引用
收藏
页码:24 / 31
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Monitoring the quality of care by quality indicators
    Nicolosi, E
    Molino, F
    Pandolfo, G
    Molino, G
    MEDICAL INFORMATICS EUROPE '96: HUMAN FACETS IN INFORMATION TECHNOLOGIES, 1996, 34 : 379 - 383
  • [32] Responsiveness of the National Eye Institute Refractive Error Quality of Life instrument to surgical correction of refractive error
    McDonnell, PJ
    Mangione, C
    Lee, P
    Lindblad, AS
    Spritzer, KL
    Berry, S
    Hays, RD
    OPHTHALMOLOGY, 2003, 110 (12) : 2302 - 2309
  • [33] Can Quality of Care Indicators Measure Quality of Care?
    Strasser, Dale C.
    Falconer, Judith A.
    Uomoto, Jay M.
    ARCHIVES OF PHYSICAL MEDICINE AND REHABILITATION, 2012, 93 (11): : 2130 - 2131
  • [34] Refinement of indicators and criteria in a quality tool for assessing quality in primary care in Canada: a Delphi Panel study
    Levitt, Cheryl A.
    Nair, Kalpana
    Dolovich, Lisa
    Price, David
    Hilts, Linda
    FAMILY PRACTICE, 2014, 31 (05) : 607 - 621
  • [35] ASSESSING THE VISQOL PROM IN PATIENTS WITH REFRACTIVE ERROR TREATED BY TEMLA
    Ting, Chloe F. T.
    Ng, Jonathon
    Clark, Antony
    Morlet, Nigel
    CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL OPHTHALMOLOGY, 2017, 45 : 129 - 129
  • [36] The validity of indicators for assessing quality of care: a review of the European literature on hospital readmission rate
    Fischer, Claudia
    Anema, Helen A.
    Klazinga, Niek S.
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH, 2012, 22 (04): : 484 - 491
  • [37] Assessing equity and quality indicators for older people – Adaptation and validation of the Assessing Care of Vulnerable Elders (ACOVE) checklist for the Portuguese care context
    Adriana Taveira
    Ana Paula Macedo
    Nazaré Rego
    José Crispim
    BMC Geriatrics, 22
  • [38] Assessing equity and quality indicators for older people - Adaptation and validation of the Assessing Care of Vulnerable Elders (ACOVE) checklist for the Portuguese care context
    Taveira, Adriana
    Macedo, Ana Paula
    Rego, Nazare
    Crispim, Jose
    BMC GERIATRICS, 2022, 22 (01)
  • [39] Assessing quality of care
    Sundin, JO
    CANADIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION JOURNAL, 2000, 162 (03) : 317 - +
  • [40] Quality Indicators for Critical Care
    Pyle, Kirsten
    Wavra, Teresa
    AACN ADVANCED CRITICAL CARE, 2007, 18 (03) : 229 - 243