Comparative outcomes of selective laser trabeculoplasty delivered by optometrists compared with ophthalmologists: a UK-based multicentre observational study

BackgroundSelective laser trabeculoplasty (SLT), a National Institute for Care and Health Excellence recommended first-line treatment for open-angle glaucoma and ocular hypertension, is increasingly delivered by optometrists. This retrospective multicentre observational study evaluates real-world ou...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inBMJ open ophthalmology Vol. 9; no. 1; p. e001870
Main Authors Lee, Chan Ning, Delaney, Alexander, Richardson, Jay A L, Freeman, Graham, Gunn, Patrick J G, Harthan, Stephen, Dubois, Vincent, Yau, Kenneth, Hemmerdinger, Christopher, Harper, Robert, Vallabh, Neeru A
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published England BMJ Publishing Group Ltd 02.10.2024
BMJ Publishing Group LTD
BMJ Publishing Group
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:BackgroundSelective laser trabeculoplasty (SLT), a National Institute for Care and Health Excellence recommended first-line treatment for open-angle glaucoma and ocular hypertension, is increasingly delivered by optometrists. This retrospective multicentre observational study evaluates real-world outcomes of SLT comparing optometrist-treated to ophthalmologist-treated eyes.MethodsAdults aged ≥40 years receiving first SLT treatment at three UK hospital eye units (Aintree, Manchester, Macclesfield) between 1 August 2018 and 1 August 2021 were analysed using anonymised local audit data. Outcomes included intraocular pressure (IOP), visual acuity (VA), drop burden, complications including post-SLT IOP spikes, and composite treatment failures including repeat laser or glaucoma surgery, evaluated at 6-monthly intervals up to 24 months. Groups were compared with parametric and non-parametric tests, accounting for intereye correlation, and Kaplan-Meier survival analysis using composite treatment failure endpoints was conducted.Results207 eyes (131 patients) were analysed, 84 (56 patients) optometrist-treated eyes compared with 123 ophthalmologist-treated eyes (75 patients). No statistically significant differences (p>0.05) were found in change in VA, IOP or glaucoma drops from pre-SLT baseline between optometrist and ophthalmologist-treated eyes, at all time points. More cataracts were detected in optometrist-treated eyes, however, this did not affect differences in VA or cataract surgery frequency. More optometrist-treated eyes underwent glaucoma surgery, however, ophthalmologist-treated eyes had higher drop burden and chance of composite treatment failure up to month 18.ConclusionOutcomes of SLT treatment by optometrists and ophthalmologists are comparable up to 24 months post-treatment. Ophthalmologist-treated eyes may have had more aggressive eye-drop treatment, preventing the need for surgery.
Bibliography:Original research
ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ObjectType-Undefined-3
Additional supplemental material is published online only. To view, please visit the journal online (https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjophth-2024-001870).
RH is an expert witness for the General Optical Council and is a member of the 2022 NICE guideline committee. None of the other authors have competing interests with respect to this study.
Supplemental material This content has been supplied by the author(s). It has not been vetted by BMJ Publishing Group Limited (BMJ) and may not have been peer-reviewed. Any opinions or recommendations discussed are solely those of the author(s) and are not endorsed by BMJ. BMJ disclaims all liability and responsibility arising from any reliance placed on the content. Where the content includes any translated material, BMJ does not warrant the accuracy and reliability of the translations (including but not limited to local regulations, clinical guidelines, terminology, drug names and drug dosages), and is not responsible for any error and/or omissions arising from translation and adaptation or otherwise.
ISSN:2397-3269
2397-3269
DOI:10.1136/bmjophth-2024-001870