Cargando…

Utilization of Online Resources by Patients in an Ophthalmic Emergency Department

Objective  To describe the utilization of online resources by patients prior to presentation to an ophthalmic emergency department (ED) and to assess the accuracy of online resources for ophthalmic diagnoses. Methods  This is a prospective survey of patients presenting to an ophthalmic ED for initia...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hwang, Jodi C., Yannuzzi, Nicolas A., Cavuoto, Kara M., Ansari, Zubair, Patel, Nimesh A., Goodman, Courtney F., Lang, Steven, Sridhar, Jayanth
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc. 2021
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9928005/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37388833
http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0040-1722310
Descripción
Sumario:Objective  To describe the utilization of online resources by patients prior to presentation to an ophthalmic emergency department (ED) and to assess the accuracy of online resources for ophthalmic diagnoses. Methods  This is a prospective survey of patients presenting to an ophthalmic ED for initial evaluation of ocular symptoms. Prior to evaluation, patients completed surveys assessing ocular symptoms, Internet usage, and presumed self-diagnoses. Demographics and characteristics of Internet usage were determined. Accuracy of self-diagnoses was compared between Internet users and nonusers. Diagnoses were classified as high or low acuity based on agreement between senior authors. Results  A total of 144 patients completed surveys. Mean (standard deviation) age was 53.2 years (18.0). One-third of patients used the Internet for health-related searches prior to presentation. Internet users were younger compared with nonusers (48.2 years [16.5] vs. 55.5 years [18.3], p  = 0.02). There were no differences in sex, ethnicity, or race. Overall, there was a threefold difference in proportion of patients correctly predicting their diagnoses, with Internet users correctly predicting their diagnoses more often than nonusers (41 vs. 13%, p  < 0.001). When excluding cases of known trauma, the difference in proportion increased to fivefold (Internet users 40% vs. nonusers 8%, p  < 0.001). Upon classification by acuity level, Internet users demonstrated greater accuracy than nonusers for both high- (42 vs. 17%, p  = 0.03) and low (41 vs. 10%, p  = 0.001)-acuity diagnoses. Greatest accuracy was in cases of external lid conditions such as chalazia and hordeola (100% [4/4] of Internet users vs. 40% (2/5) of nonusers), conjunctivitis (43% [3/7] of Internet users vs. 25% [2/8] of nonusers), and retinal traction or detachments (57% [4/7] of Internet users vs. 0% [0/4] of nonusers). The most frequently visited Web sites were Google (82%) and WebMD (40%). Patient accuracy did not change according to the number of Web sites visited, but patients who visited the Mayo Clinic Web site had greater accuracy compared with those who visited other Web sites (89 vs. 30%, p  = 0.003). Conclusion  Patients with ocular symptoms may seek medical information on the Internet before evaluation by a physician in an ophthalmic ED. Online resources may improve the accuracy of patient self-diagnosis for low- and high-acuity diagnoses.