OBJECTIVE: Ophthalmic services are currently under considerable stress; in the UK, ophthalmology departments have the highest number of outpatient appointments of any department within the National Health Service. Recognising the need for intervention, several approaches have been trialled to tackle the high numbers of false-positive referrals initiated in primary care and seen face to face within the hospital eye service (HES). In this mixed-methods narrative synthesis, we explored interventions based on their clinical impact, cost and acceptability to determine whether they are clinically effective, safe and sustainable. A systematic literature search of PubMed, MEDLINE and CINAHL, guided by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA), was used to identify appropriate studies published between December 2001 and December 2022.
RESULTS: A total of 55 studies were reviewed. Four main interventions were assessed, where two studies covered more than one type: training and guidelines (n = 8), referral filtering schemes (n = 32), asynchronous teleophthalmology (n = 13) and synchronous teleophthalmology (n = 5). All four approaches demonstrated effectiveness for reducing false-positive referrals to the HES. There was sufficient evidence for stakeholder acceptance and cost-effectiveness of referral filtering schemes; however, cost comparisons involved assumptions. Referral filtering and asynchronous teleophthalmology reported moderate levels of false-negative cases (2%-20%), defined as discharged patients requiring HES monitoring.
CONCLUSIONS: The effectiveness of interventions varied depending on which outcome and stakeholder was considered. More studies are required to explore stakeholder opinions around all interventions. In order to maximise clinical safety, it may be appropriate to combine more than one approach, such as referral filtering schemes with virtual review of discharged patients to assess the rate of false-negative cases. The implementation of a successful intervention is more complex than a \'one-size-fits-all\' approach and there is potential space for newer types of interventions, such as artificial intelligence clinical support systems within the referral pathway.

In the UK, ophthalmology has the highest number of outpatient appointments within the National Health Service. False-positive referrals from primary care are one of the main factors contributing to the oversubscription of hospital eye services (HESs). We reviewed the accuracy of referrals originating from primary care optometrists and contributing factors, such as condition type and years since registration.
Of the 31 studies included in the review, 22 were retrospective analyses of referrals and appointments at the HES. Eight were prospective studies, and one used online clinical vignettes. Seven assessed the accuracy of referrals for all ocular conditions. The remaining studies focused on glaucoma (n = 11), cataracts (n = 7), emergency conditions (n = 4), neovascular age-related macular degeneration (n = 1) and paediatric binocular vision (n = 1). The diagnostic agreement for suspected emergency ocular conditions was the lowest, with only 21.1% of referrals considered to require urgent attention in one study. For glaucoma, the first-visit discharge rate was high (16.7%-48%). Optometrist referral accuracy was overall 18.6% higher than General Medical Practitioners\'; however, the two mainly referred different ocular conditions. Female optometrists made more false-positive referrals than males (p = 0.008). The proportion of false positives decreased by 6.2% per year since registration (p < 0.001).
There was significant variation in referral accuracy across different ocular conditions, partly due to differences when defining accurate referrals. Optometrists working in primary care are generally more limited in their resources than the HES. Thus, choosing the cautious option of referral when they are unsure could be in the patients\' best interests. The possible effect of increased use of advanced imaging on referrals requires evaluation. Although interventions such as refinement schemes have been put in place, these vary across regions, and their approaches such as virtual referral triaging may reduce unnecessary HES face-to-face appointments and promote communication between primary and secondary care.

Eye doctors regularly convey serious illness news to their patients. There is an evolving understanding of how medical educators can effectively teach this vital communication skill during real-time patient care. This article proposes teaching strategies to improve clinical optometric education related to serious illness conversations.Effectively conveying serious illness news is an essential skill in optometry practice. Established protocols can help optometrists navigate these nuanced, emotional, and complex conversations with patients, yet protocols for teaching this skill in eye care settings have not been described. Clinical educators need discrete strategies for making such pivotal communication skills learnable in an environment where patient care, teaching priorities, and limited resources are regularly juggled. Despite the importance of this competency, limited study has focused on teaching optometry learners to deliver serious eye news. In this article, we explore the importance of optometry talk, serious news delivery tools, and considerations for optometric educators teaching serious news delivery. We then adapt specific strategies from medical education to help optometry educators teach serious news delivery in clinical settings.

Introduction: The objective of this systematic search and review was to investigate the role of optometrists in teleophthalmology and digital referral. We examine the implications of the optometric communities\' increasing access to advanced imaging, such as optical coherence tomography (OCT), in ophthalmic telemedicine schemes. Methods: A systematic search was conducted, using PubMed and Embase, in April of 2019. Eight hundred eight (n = 808) texts were retrieved and 99 articles were deemed eligible for full-text review. Twenty-six (n = 26) studies were included in the qualitative synthesis. All studies involved optometrists as principal service providers. Results: Findings demonstrate that optometrist-facilitated teleophthalmology results in consistent reductions in hospital referrals and waiting times, as well as high patient satisfaction. Optometrists are identified as crucial to the success of many projects and their access to advanced imaging technology is observed to position optometry practices as the most convenient location to establish a teleophthalmology program. OCT imaging demonstrated the potential to increase diagnostic accuracy and is increasingly prevalent in optometry practice. The importance of additional training for optometrists participating in teleophthalmology schemes is highlighted, as is the need for appropriate remuneration for those involved. Conclusion: The role of community-based ophthalmic care in reducing demands on hospital eye services (HES) is highlighted by our results, demonstrating that optometrist-facilitated teleophthalmology can dramatically reduce referrals and streamline care. In addition, the increasing prevalence of OCT in optometric practice represents an underutilized resource for HES.

BACKGROUND: Direct referrals from optometrists account for up to 10% eye casualty attendances. Despite this, there remains a paucity of literature on optometrist referrals to eye casualty. A better understanding of these referrals could be helpful in the development of shared care emergency pathways. Diagnostic agreement between optometrists and ophthalmologists for emergency referrals can be used to identify areas for development of shared care working strategies in emergency ophthalmology.
METHODS: A retrospective evaluation of 1059 consecutive optometric emergency referrals to Moorfields Eye Hospital was conducted. Referrals were only included when a letter or documentation for the reason for referral was provided. Diagnostic information from the referring optometrist and casualty doctor was summarised for each patient by an investigator (VMT) and recorded on a single spreadsheet. These clinical summaries were compared by a second independent investigator (IJ) and marked as agreeing, disagreeing or uncertain. Each clinical summary was then mapped to a diagnostic category using key word searches which were manually re-checked against the original summaries. Information on the timing of the referral and the outcome at the emergency department visit was also collated. Inter-observer agreement for diagnostic categories was measured using kappa coefficients.
RESULTS: Diagnostic agreement ranged between kappa 0.59 and 0.87. It was best for diagnoses within the red eye category (kappa 0.87). Compliance with College of Optometrists referral guidance ranged between 11 and 100%. More than half of referrals for elevated intra-ocular pressure were discharged at the eye casualty visit. Overall, 54% of patients were managed with advice alone, 39% required treatment following referral and 7% required onward referral from eye casualty.
CONCLUSIONS: The majority of patients referred by optometrists were managed with advice alone. A collaborative approach at the point referral could be helpful to improve referral efficiency.

Cognitive biases, systematic errors in thinking that impact a person\'s choices and judgments, can influence decision making at various points during patient care provision. These biases can potentially result in misdiagnoses, delayed clinical care, and/or patient mismanagement. A range of interventions exists to mitigate cognitive biases. There is a need to understand the relative efficacy of these interventions within the context of eye care practice.
The aim of this systematic review was to synthesize the evidence relating to interventions for mitigating cognitive biases associated with clinical decision making by eye care professionals.
Electronic databases (including Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, PsycINFO) were searched from inception to October 2017 for studies investigating interventions intended to mitigate cognitive biases in the clinical decision making of eye care professionals. This review was undertaken in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses reporting guidelines.
To ensure inclusion of all relevant literature, a wide range of study designs was eligible for inclusion, such as randomized controlled trials, nonrandomized trials, interrupted time series and repeated measures, controlled before-after studies, and qualitative studies that were a component of any of these quantitative study designs.
Two review authors independently screened titles, abstracts, and full-text articles in duplicate, applying a priori eligibility criteria.
After screening 2759 nonduplicate records, including full-text screening of 201 articles, no relevant studies were identified.
Given that cognitive biases can significantly impact the accuracy of clinical decision making and thus can have major effects on clinical care and patient health outcomes, the lack of studies identified in this systematic review indicates a critical need for research within the area of cognitive bias mitigation for decision making within eye care practice.

Referrals to ophthalmology are predominantly made from general practitioners (GPs) and optometrists. These two groups of referrers receive differing types and levels of training and are equipped with different instrumentation. The purpose of this study was to determine whether the quality of referrals to the hospital eye service (HES) differs between GPs and optometrists in Walsall.
Referrals into the HES were identified from Q1 2014 retrospectively until 1000 notes had been reached. Each record was scrutinized using a standard template. Data were analysed and summary statistics produced including positive predictive values and interobserver agreement.
We achieved our target of auditing 1000 records. The false-positive rate (patients being discharged from HES with a \'normal vision\' diagnosis) was 7.7% of referrals from GPs and 6.2% of referrals from optometrists. Concordance between referred condition and diagnosed condition at HES between optometrists and ophthalmologists was 76.1%, and between GPs and ophthalmologists was 67.2%.
In view of findings from this study, it is important for commissioners in the new reconfigured National Health Service to ensure that enhanced ophthalmic services are commissioned only on the basis of hard evidence sourced from local data rather than opinion or on data from another geographical area.