Cargando…

Accuracy of Ophthalmology Clinic Follow-Up in the Incarcerated Patient Population

Purpose  Incarcerated patients represent a uniquely vulnerable population in the outpatient ophthalmology setting, and the reliability of follow-up in this group is undetermined. Methods  This was a retrospective, observational chart review of consecutive incarcerated patients evaluated at the ophth...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Abou-Jaoude, Michelle M., Crawford, Jessica, Kryscio, Richard J., Moore, Daniel B.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc. 2022
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9927990/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37388171
http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0042-1758562
_version_ 1784888560952803328
author Abou-Jaoude, Michelle M.
Crawford, Jessica
Kryscio, Richard J.
Moore, Daniel B.
author_facet Abou-Jaoude, Michelle M.
Crawford, Jessica
Kryscio, Richard J.
Moore, Daniel B.
author_sort Abou-Jaoude, Michelle M.
collection PubMed
description Purpose  Incarcerated patients represent a uniquely vulnerable population in the outpatient ophthalmology setting, and the reliability of follow-up in this group is undetermined. Methods  This was a retrospective, observational chart review of consecutive incarcerated patients evaluated at the ophthalmology clinic of a single academic medical center between July 2012 and September 2016. For each encounter the following were recorded: patient age, gender, incarcerated status at the time of encounter (a subset of patients had encounters before/after incarceration), interventions performed, follow-up interval requested, urgency of follow-up, and actual time to subsequent follow-up. Primary outcome measures were no-show rate and timeliness, which was defined as follow-up within 1.5× the requested period. Results  There were 489 patients included during the study period, representing a total of 2,014 clinical encounters. Of the 489 patients, 189 (38.7%) were seen once. Of the remaining 300 patients with more than one encounter, 184 (61.3%) ultimately did not return and only 24 (8%) were always on time for every encounter. Of 1,747 encounters with specific follow-up requested, 1,072 were considered timely (61.3%). Factors significantly associated with subsequent loss to follow-up include whether a procedure was performed ( p  < 0.0001), urgency of follow-up ( p  < 0.0001), incarcerated status ( p  = 0.0408), and whether follow-up was requested ( p  < 0.0001). Conclusion  Almost two-thirds of incarcerated patients in our population requiring repeat examination were lost to follow-up, particularly those who underwent an intervention or required more urgent follow-up. Patients entering and exiting the penal system were less likely to follow-up while incarcerated. Further work is needed to understand how these gaps compare to those in the general population and to identify means of improving these outcomes.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9927990
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-99279902023-06-29 Accuracy of Ophthalmology Clinic Follow-Up in the Incarcerated Patient Population Abou-Jaoude, Michelle M. Crawford, Jessica Kryscio, Richard J. Moore, Daniel B. J Acad Ophthalmol (2017) Purpose  Incarcerated patients represent a uniquely vulnerable population in the outpatient ophthalmology setting, and the reliability of follow-up in this group is undetermined. Methods  This was a retrospective, observational chart review of consecutive incarcerated patients evaluated at the ophthalmology clinic of a single academic medical center between July 2012 and September 2016. For each encounter the following were recorded: patient age, gender, incarcerated status at the time of encounter (a subset of patients had encounters before/after incarceration), interventions performed, follow-up interval requested, urgency of follow-up, and actual time to subsequent follow-up. Primary outcome measures were no-show rate and timeliness, which was defined as follow-up within 1.5× the requested period. Results  There were 489 patients included during the study period, representing a total of 2,014 clinical encounters. Of the 489 patients, 189 (38.7%) were seen once. Of the remaining 300 patients with more than one encounter, 184 (61.3%) ultimately did not return and only 24 (8%) were always on time for every encounter. Of 1,747 encounters with specific follow-up requested, 1,072 were considered timely (61.3%). Factors significantly associated with subsequent loss to follow-up include whether a procedure was performed ( p  < 0.0001), urgency of follow-up ( p  < 0.0001), incarcerated status ( p  = 0.0408), and whether follow-up was requested ( p  < 0.0001). Conclusion  Almost two-thirds of incarcerated patients in our population requiring repeat examination were lost to follow-up, particularly those who underwent an intervention or required more urgent follow-up. Patients entering and exiting the penal system were less likely to follow-up while incarcerated. Further work is needed to understand how these gaps compare to those in the general population and to identify means of improving these outcomes. Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc. 2022-11-19 /pmc/articles/PMC9927990/ /pubmed/37388171 http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0042-1758562 Text en The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ ) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License, which permits unrestricted reproduction and distribution, for non-commercial purposes only; and use and reproduction, but not distribution, of adapted material for non-commercial purposes only, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Abou-Jaoude, Michelle M.
Crawford, Jessica
Kryscio, Richard J.
Moore, Daniel B.
Accuracy of Ophthalmology Clinic Follow-Up in the Incarcerated Patient Population
title Accuracy of Ophthalmology Clinic Follow-Up in the Incarcerated Patient Population
title_full Accuracy of Ophthalmology Clinic Follow-Up in the Incarcerated Patient Population
title_fullStr Accuracy of Ophthalmology Clinic Follow-Up in the Incarcerated Patient Population
title_full_unstemmed Accuracy of Ophthalmology Clinic Follow-Up in the Incarcerated Patient Population
title_short Accuracy of Ophthalmology Clinic Follow-Up in the Incarcerated Patient Population
title_sort accuracy of ophthalmology clinic follow-up in the incarcerated patient population
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9927990/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37388171
http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0042-1758562
work_keys_str_mv AT aboujaoudemichellem accuracyofophthalmologyclinicfollowupintheincarceratedpatientpopulation
AT crawfordjessica accuracyofophthalmologyclinicfollowupintheincarceratedpatientpopulation
AT krysciorichardj accuracyofophthalmologyclinicfollowupintheincarceratedpatientpopulation
AT mooredanielb accuracyofophthalmologyclinicfollowupintheincarceratedpatientpopulation