ArticleEye (London, England)2021
Ophthalmic nurse practitioner assessment of glaucoma: evaluating agreement within an initiative to enhance capacity in glaucoma clinics.
Article in Eye (London, England), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Providing capacity in glaucoma care using trained and accredited optometrists: A qualitative evaluation.Eye (London, England) · 2024Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsA local service evaluation was conducted in order to compare clinical assessment measures and management decisions between an ophthalmic nurse practitioner and a reference standard glaucoma consultant, for patients referred into secondary care with suspected Chronic Open Angle Glaucoma or Ocular Hypertension.
methodsOne hundred patients were selected. A clinical pathway incorporating the assessment methods recommended by National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) Glaucoma update 2017 (NG81) was delivered by a single ophthalmic nurse practitioner and the reference standard glaucoma consultant. Clinical findings and outcomes were recorded, with both practitioners being masked to each other's findings. Agreement was determined employing Cohen's kappa, measuring inter-rater agreement allowing for chance agreement.
resultsAgreement was observed as follows: Visual field assessment (kappa k = 0.806, 95% CI 0.661-0.951); Optical Coherence Tomography evaluation (kappa k = 0.648, 95% CI 0.507-0.798); C:D Ratio assessment (Cronbach's alpha α = 0.96, 95% CI 0.88-0.94); Diagnosis (kappa k = 0.874, 95% CI 0.818-0.914); and Treatment planning (kappa κ = 0.844, 95% CI 0.733-0.955). In three cases the nurse practitioner judged the optic nerve to appear normal, where the reference standard examiner detected glaucoma and commenced treatment.
conclusionThis service evaluation demonstrates how an ophthalmic nurse practitioner with appropriate theoretical knowledge and practical training, can develop skills to reach a high level of agreement in patient assessment and management for those patients with suspected glaucoma. Within the limitations of a single centre and single practitioner evaluation, our findings provide evidence that this model of capacity expansion ought to merit wider consideration in secondary care glaucoma services.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.