Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Title: Mapping standard ophthalmic outcome sets to metrics currently reported in eight eye hospitals
Authors: Michelotti, M
De Korne, D.F 
Weizer, J.S
Lee, P.P
Flanagan, D
Kelly, S.P
Odergren, A
Sandhu, S.S
Wai, C
Klazinga, N
Haripriya, A
Stein, J.D
Hingorani, M
Keywords: benchmarking
clinical trial
eye disease
global health
multicenter study
organization and management
outcome assessment
quality of life
Eye Diseases
Global Health
Hospitals, Special
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)
Quality of Life
Issue Date: 2017
Citation: Michelotti, M, De Korne, D.F, Weizer, J.S, Lee, P.P, Flanagan, D, Kelly, S.P, Odergren, A, Sandhu, S.S, Wai, C, Klazinga, N, Haripriya, A, Stein, J.D, Hingorani, M (2017). Mapping standard ophthalmic outcome sets to metrics currently reported in eight eye hospitals. BMC Ophthalmology 17 (1) : 269. ScholarBank@NUS Repository.
Rights: Attribution 4.0 International
Abstract: Background: To determine alignment of proposed international standard outcomes sets for ophthalmic conditions to metrics currently reported by eye hospitals. Methods: Mixed methods comparative benchmark study, including eight eye hospitals in Australia, India, Singapore, Sweden, U.K., and U.S. All are major international tertiary care and training centers in ophthalmology. Main outcome measure is consistency of ophthalmic outcomes measures reported. Results: International agreed standard outcomes (ICHOM) sets are available for cataract surgery (10 metrics) and macular degeneration (7 metrics). The eight hospitals reported 22 different metrics for cataract surgery and 2 for macular degeneration, which showed only limited overlap with the proposed ICHOM metrics. None of the hospitals reported patient reported visual functioning or vision-related quality of life outcomes measures (PROMs). Three hospitals (38%) reported rates for uncomplicated cataract surgeries only. There was marked variation in how and at what point postoperatively visual outcomes following cataract, cornea, glaucoma, strabismus and oculoplastics procedures were reported. Seven (87.5%) measured post-operative infections and four (50%) measured 30 day unplanned reoperation rates. Conclusions: Outcomes reporting for ophthalmic conditions currently widely varies across hospitals internationally and does not include patient-reported outcomes. Reaching consensus on measures and consistency in data collection will allow meaningful comparisons and provide an evidence base enabling improved sharing of "best practices" to improve eye care globally. Implementation of international standards is still a major challenge and practice-based knowledge on measures should be one of the inputs of the international standardization process. © 2017 The Author(s).
Source Title: BMC Ophthalmology
ISSN: 14712415
DOI: 10.1186/s12886-017-0667-0
Rights: Attribution 4.0 International
Appears in Collections:Elements
Staff Publications

Show full item record
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormatAccess SettingsVersion 
10_1186_s12886-017-0667-0.pdf400.14 kBAdobe PDF



Google ScholarTM



This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons