ReviewDer Ophthalmologe : Zeitschrift der Deutschen Ophthalmologischen Gesellschaft2020
[Value and formats of quality assurance : Ophthalmology and intravitreal therapy between reality and wishful thinking].
Review in Der Ophthalmologe : Zeitschrift der Deutschen Ophthalmologischen Gesellschaft, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Surgical Care in Specialist Ophthalmology Departments: Structure and Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic.Klinische Monatsblatter fur Augenheilkunde · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn view of the large number of patients and error-prone activities, legal requirements for quality assurance (QA) are of great importance for modern ophthalmology.
objectiveThis article discusses the need and formats of QA using the example of intravitreal operative medication injection therapy (IVOM). MATERIAL AND
methodsThe legal framework conditions are briefly referenced and improvement potentials of the status quo are discussed.
resultsThe first quality control instruments were implemented for IVOM therapy; however, important quality indicators (number of treatments per patient/year, loss of follow-up, course of function) are not yet evaluated nationwide in Germany and cannot therefore be taken into account for continuous improvement and QA reports. To date, not all ophthalmologists involved have been under review in the field of basic diagnostics and follow-up. Limiting QA to ophthalmic surgeons alone does not improve quality and many statutory health insurances actively prevent scientific investigations within selective contracts.
conclusionFor the QA of imaging diagnostics, similar proficiency measures (random samples, round robin testing) are required in ophthalmology as in radiological disciplines. The communication of transparent quality indicators can reduce the risk in the medium term. The quality of treatment and results must not be left to chance, cost pressure or convenience. The manufacturers of software and diagnostic equipment should be oriented towards radiology, where the exchange of voxel-oriented image formats is now less and less hindered by proprietary formats.
Indexed as
Identifiers
32170364What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.