Trends in Use of Ancillary Glaucoma Tests for Patients with Open-Angle Glaucoma from 2001 to 2009

Purpose To assess trends in the use of ancillary diagnostic tests in the evaluation of patients with open-angle glaucoma (OAG) and glaucoma suspects over the past decade. Design Retrospective, longitudinal cohort analysis. Participants A total of 169 917 individuals with OAG and 395 721 individuals...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inOphthalmology (Rochester, Minn.) Vol. 119; no. 4; pp. 748 - 758
Main Authors Stein, Joshua D., MD, MS, Talwar, Nidhi, MA, LaVerne, Alejandra M., BS, Nan, Bin, PhD, Lichter, Paul R., MD
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published New York, NY Elsevier Inc 01.04.2012
Elsevier
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
Abstract Purpose To assess trends in the use of ancillary diagnostic tests in the evaluation of patients with open-angle glaucoma (OAG) and glaucoma suspects over the past decade. Design Retrospective, longitudinal cohort analysis. Participants A total of 169 917 individuals with OAG and 395 721 individuals with suspected glaucoma aged ≥40 years enrolled in a national United States managed care network between 2001 and 2009. Methods Claims data were analyzed to assess trends in visual field (VF) testing, fundus photography (FP), and other ocular imaging (OOI) testing for patients with OAG or suspected glaucoma between 2001 and 2009. Repeated-measures logistic regression was performed to identify differences in the odds of undergoing these procedures in 2001, 2005, and 2009 and whether differences exist for patients under the exclusive care of optometrists versus ophthalmologists. Main Outcome Measures Odds and annual probabilities of undergoing VF testing, FP, and OOI for OAG from 2001 to 2009. Results For patients with OAG, the odds of undergoing VF testing decreased by 36% from 2001 to 2005, by 12% from 2005 to 2009, and by 44% from 2001 to 2009. By comparison, the odds of having OOI increased by 100% from 2001 to 2005, by 24% from 2005 to 2009, and by 147% from 2001 to 2009. Probabilities of undergoing FP were relatively low (13%–25%) for both provider types and remained fairly steady over the decade. For patients cared for exclusively by optometrists, the probability of VF testing decreased from 66% in 2001 to 44% in 2009. Among those seen exclusively by ophthalmologists, the probability of VF testing decreased from 65% in 2001 to 51% in 2009. The probability of undergoing OOI increased from 26% in 2001 to 47% in 2009 for patients of optometrists and from 30% in 2001 to 46% in 2009 for patients of ophthalmologists. By 2008, patients with OAG receiving care exclusively by optometrists had a higher probability of undergoing OOI than VF testing. Conclusions From 2001 to 2009, OOI increased dramatically whereas VF testing declined considerably. Because OOI has not been shown to be as effective at detecting OAG or disease progression compared with VF testing, increased reliance on OOI technology, in lieu of VF testing, may be detrimental to patient care. Financial Disclosure(s) The author(s) have no proprietary or commercial interest in any materials discussed in this article.
AbstractList PURPOSETo assess trends in the use of ancillary diagnostic tests in the evaluation of patients with open-angle glaucoma (OAG) and glaucoma suspects over the past decade. DESIGNRetrospective, longitudinal cohort analysis. PARTICIPANTSA total of 169 917 individuals with OAG and 395 721 individuals with suspected glaucoma aged ≥40 years enrolled in a national United States managed care network between 2001 and 2009. METHODSClaims data were analyzed to assess trends in visual field (VF) testing, fundus photography (FP), and other ocular imaging (OOI) testing for patients with OAG or suspected glaucoma between 2001 and 2009. Repeated-measures logistic regression was performed to identify differences in the odds of undergoing these procedures in 2001, 2005, and 2009 and whether differences exist for patients under the exclusive care of optometrists versus ophthalmologists. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURESOdds and annual probabilities of undergoing VF testing, FP, and OOI for OAG from 2001 to 2009. RESULTSFor patients with OAG, the odds of undergoing VF testing decreased by 36% from 2001 to 2005, by 12% from 2005 to 2009, and by 44% from 2001 to 2009. By comparison, the odds of having OOI increased by 100% from 2001 to 2005, by 24% from 2005 to 2009, and by 147% from 2001 to 2009. Probabilities of undergoing FP were relatively low (13%-25%) for both provider types and remained fairly steady over the decade. For patients cared for exclusively by optometrists, the probability of VF testing decreased from 66% in 2001 to 44% in 2009. Among those seen exclusively by ophthalmologists, the probability of VF testing decreased from 65% in 2001 to 51% in 2009. The probability of undergoing OOI increased from 26% in 2001 to 47% in 2009 for patients of optometrists and from 30% in 2001 to 46% in 2009 for patients of ophthalmologists. By 2008, patients with OAG receiving care exclusively by optometrists had a higher probability of undergoing OOI than VF testing. CONCLUSIONSFrom 2001 to 2009, OOI increased dramatically whereas VF testing declined considerably. Because OOI has not been shown to be as effective at detecting OAG or disease progression compared with VF testing, increased reliance on OOI technology, in lieu of VF testing, may be detrimental to patient care.
Purpose To assess trends in the use of ancillary diagnostic tests in the evaluation of patients with open-angle glaucoma (OAG) and glaucoma suspects over the past decade. Design Retrospective, longitudinal cohort analysis. Participants A total of 169 917 individuals with OAG and 395 721 individuals with suspected glaucoma aged ≥40 years enrolled in a national United States managed care network between 2001 and 2009. Methods Claims data were analyzed to assess trends in visual field (VF) testing, fundus photography (FP), and other ocular imaging (OOI) testing for patients with OAG or suspected glaucoma between 2001 and 2009. Repeated-measures logistic regression was performed to identify differences in the odds of undergoing these procedures in 2001, 2005, and 2009 and whether differences exist for patients under the exclusive care of optometrists versus ophthalmologists. Main Outcome Measures Odds and annual probabilities of undergoing VF testing, FP, and OOI for OAG from 2001 to 2009. Results For patients with OAG, the odds of undergoing VF testing decreased by 36% from 2001 to 2005, by 12% from 2005 to 2009, and by 44% from 2001 to 2009. By comparison, the odds of having OOI increased by 100% from 2001 to 2005, by 24% from 2005 to 2009, and by 147% from 2001 to 2009. Probabilities of undergoing FP were relatively low (13%–25%) for both provider types and remained fairly steady over the decade. For patients cared for exclusively by optometrists, the probability of VF testing decreased from 66% in 2001 to 44% in 2009. Among those seen exclusively by ophthalmologists, the probability of VF testing decreased from 65% in 2001 to 51% in 2009. The probability of undergoing OOI increased from 26% in 2001 to 47% in 2009 for patients of optometrists and from 30% in 2001 to 46% in 2009 for patients of ophthalmologists. By 2008, patients with OAG receiving care exclusively by optometrists had a higher probability of undergoing OOI than VF testing. Conclusions From 2001 to 2009, OOI increased dramatically whereas VF testing declined considerably. Because OOI has not been shown to be as effective at detecting OAG or disease progression compared with VF testing, increased reliance on OOI technology, in lieu of VF testing, may be detrimental to patient care. Financial Disclosure(s) The author(s) have no proprietary or commercial interest in any materials discussed in this article.
To assess trends in the use of ancillary diagnostic tests in the evaluation of patients with open-angle glaucoma (OAG) and glaucoma suspects over the past decade. Retrospective, longitudinal cohort analysis. A total of 169 917 individuals with OAG and 395 721 individuals with suspected glaucoma aged ≥40 years enrolled in a national United States managed care network between 2001 and 2009. Claims data were analyzed to assess trends in visual field (VF) testing, fundus photography (FP), and other ocular imaging (OOI) testing for patients with OAG or suspected glaucoma between 2001 and 2009. Repeated-measures logistic regression was performed to identify differences in the odds of undergoing these procedures in 2001, 2005, and 2009 and whether differences exist for patients under the exclusive care of optometrists versus ophthalmologists. Odds and annual probabilities of undergoing VF testing, FP, and OOI for OAG from 2001 to 2009. For patients with OAG, the odds of undergoing VF testing decreased by 36% from 2001 to 2005, by 12% from 2005 to 2009, and by 44% from 2001 to 2009. By comparison, the odds of having OOI increased by 100% from 2001 to 2005, by 24% from 2005 to 2009, and by 147% from 2001 to 2009. Probabilities of undergoing FP were relatively low (13%-25%) for both provider types and remained fairly steady over the decade. For patients cared for exclusively by optometrists, the probability of VF testing decreased from 66% in 2001 to 44% in 2009. Among those seen exclusively by ophthalmologists, the probability of VF testing decreased from 65% in 2001 to 51% in 2009. The probability of undergoing OOI increased from 26% in 2001 to 47% in 2009 for patients of optometrists and from 30% in 2001 to 46% in 2009 for patients of ophthalmologists. By 2008, patients with OAG receiving care exclusively by optometrists had a higher probability of undergoing OOI than VF testing. From 2001 to 2009, OOI increased dramatically whereas VF testing declined considerably. Because OOI has not been shown to be as effective at detecting OAG or disease progression compared with VF testing, increased reliance on OOI technology, in lieu of VF testing, may be detrimental to patient care.
To assess trends in the use of ancillary diagnostic tests in the evaluation of patients with open-angle glaucoma (OAG) and glaucoma suspects over the past decade. Retrospective, longitudinal cohort analysis. A total of 169 917 individuals with OAG and 395 721 individuals with suspected glaucoma aged ≥40 years enrolled in a national United States managed care network between 2001 and 2009. Claims data were analyzed to assess trends in visual field (VF) testing, fundus photography (FP), and other ocular imaging (OOI) testing for patients with OAG or suspected glaucoma between 2001 and 2009. Repeated-measures logistic regression was performed to identify differences in the odds of undergoing these procedures in 2001, 2005, and 2009 and whether differences exist for patients under the exclusive care of optometrists versus ophthalmologists. Odds and annual probabilities of undergoing VF testing, FP, and OOI for OAG from 2001 to 2009. For patients with OAG, the odds of undergoing VF testing decreased by 36% from 2001 to 2005, by 12% from 2005 to 2009, and by 44% from 2001 to 2009. By comparison, the odds of having OOI increased by 100% from 2001 to 2005, by 24% from 2005 to 2009, and by 147% from 2001 to 2009. Probabilities of undergoing FP were relatively low (13%–25%) for both provider types and remained fairly steady over the decade. For patients cared for exclusively by optometrists, the probability of VF testing decreased from 66% in 2001 to 44% in 2009. Among those seen exclusively by ophthalmologists, the probability of VF testing decreased from 65% in 2001 to 51% in 2009. The probability of undergoing OOI increased from 26% in 2001 to 47% in 2009 for patients of optometrists and from 30% in 2001 to 46% in 2009 for patients of ophthalmologists. By 2008, patients with OAG receiving care exclusively by optometrists had a higher probability of undergoing OOI than VF testing. From 2001 to 2009, OOI increased dramatically whereas VF testing declined considerably. Because OOI has not been shown to be as effective at detecting OAG or disease progression compared with VF testing, increased reliance on OOI technology, in lieu of VF testing, may be detrimental to patient care. The author(s) have no proprietary or commercial interest in any materials discussed in this article.
Author Lichter, Paul R., MD
Stein, Joshua D., MD, MS
Nan, Bin, PhD
Talwar, Nidhi, MA
LaVerne, Alejandra M., BS
Author_xml – sequence: 1
  fullname: Stein, Joshua D., MD, MS
– sequence: 2
  fullname: Talwar, Nidhi, MA
– sequence: 3
  fullname: LaVerne, Alejandra M., BS
– sequence: 4
  fullname: Nan, Bin, PhD
– sequence: 5
  fullname: Lichter, Paul R., MD
BackLink http://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=25948569$$DView record in Pascal Francis
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22218146$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed
BookMark eNqFks-L1DAUgIOsuLOr_4FILuKp9b00TacXYVh0FRZWcDyHNH11MnaSMWmV_e9NmdEFL54ege_9-vKu2IUPnhh7iVAioHq7L8NxN-1MKQCxhLYEWT9hK6xlW8gGqwu2yhgWSgq4ZFcp7QFAqUo-Y5dCCFyjVCtmtpF8n7jz_GsiHga-8daNo4kP_HY0sw0Hw7eUpsSHEPlnMzny-fHLTTt-fyRfbPy3kR7ZIYYDFwDIp7DE9jl7Opgx0YtzvGbbD--3Nx-Lu_vbTzebu8LKVkxF0xmlSFLTkIIKkGqoqROdVXU31Kqphr5HKzqhLBlJRCi6QYK1VbekVNfszansMYYfcx5YH1yylDfxFOakW7VGaEFAJuWJtDGkFGnQx-gOeWGNoBe1eq9PavWiVkOrs9qc9urcYO4O1P9N-uMyA6_PgEnWjEM02WR65OpWrmvVZu7diaNs46ejqJPNUi31LpKddB_c_yb5t4AdnXe553d6oLQPc_TZtEadhAb9ZTmD5QoQ83dUqKrf5muuIw
CODEN OPHTDG
CitedBy_id crossref_primary_10_1016_j_ophtha_2015_04_015
crossref_primary_10_1016_j_ajo_2017_04_022
crossref_primary_10_1016_j_ajo_2020_08_018
crossref_primary_10_1111_opo_12150
crossref_primary_10_1016_j_ophtha_2016_01_041
crossref_primary_10_1016_j_xops_2021_100097
crossref_primary_10_1038_s41598_019_54792_w
crossref_primary_10_1136_bjophthalmol_2016_309436
crossref_primary_10_1155_2015_746150
crossref_primary_10_1167_tvst_10_6_9
crossref_primary_10_1097_IJG_0000000000001262
crossref_primary_10_1038_s41598_019_46294_6
crossref_primary_10_1016_j_ophtha_2014_05_024
crossref_primary_10_1016_j_ophtha_2016_02_020
crossref_primary_10_1377_hlthaff_2015_1007
crossref_primary_10_1097_IJG_0000000000002339
crossref_primary_10_3341_kjo_2018_0105
crossref_primary_10_1007_s40135_014_0049_1
crossref_primary_10_3390_genes12121961
crossref_primary_10_1016_j_survophthal_2020_03_002
crossref_primary_10_1136_bjophthalmol_2015_307313
crossref_primary_10_12968_opti_2018_7_176348
crossref_primary_10_1016_j_ophtha_2015_10_017
crossref_primary_10_1016_j_ophtha_2021_04_022
crossref_primary_10_1038_s41598_020_80401_2
crossref_primary_10_1016_j_ophtha_2014_07_011
crossref_primary_10_1016_j_ophtha_2013_11_038
crossref_primary_10_1287_opre_2015_1405
crossref_primary_10_1016_j_ogla_2018_11_003
crossref_primary_10_1080_08164622_2021_1965461
crossref_primary_10_1167_tvst_11_3_36
crossref_primary_10_1016_j_ophtha_2023_07_020
crossref_primary_10_1167_tvst_12_10_13
crossref_primary_10_1167_tvst_11_3_18
crossref_primary_10_1016_j_ophtha_2019_09_036
crossref_primary_10_1097_IJG_0000000000000149
crossref_primary_10_3390_jcto2020005
crossref_primary_10_1016_j_survophthal_2016_01_003
crossref_primary_10_1097_IJG_0000000000000306
Cites_doi 10.1016/j.ophtha.2007.07.005
10.1097/IJG.0b013e31818159cb
10.1016/j.ophtha.2010.08.014
10.1016/j.ophtha.2005.02.030
10.1097/IJG.0b013e3181b21f99
10.1097/01.ijg.0000159129.93085.96
10.1167/iovs.06-0545
10.3928/15428877-20080501-16
10.1167/iovs.09-3715
10.1167/iovs.05-1239
10.1097/IJG.0b013e318193c2be
10.1016/S0002-9394(03)00792-X
10.1016/j.ajo.2007.07.010
10.1016/j.ophtha.2004.09.034
10.1016/j.ophtha.2008.08.013
ContentType Journal Article
Copyright American Academy of Ophthalmology
2012 American Academy of Ophthalmology
2015 INIST-CNRS
Copyright © 2012 American Academy of Ophthalmology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Copyright_xml – notice: American Academy of Ophthalmology
– notice: 2012 American Academy of Ophthalmology
– notice: 2015 INIST-CNRS
– notice: Copyright © 2012 American Academy of Ophthalmology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
DBID IQODW
CGR
CUY
CVF
ECM
EIF
NPM
AAYXX
CITATION
7X8
DOI 10.1016/j.ophtha.2011.09.045
DatabaseName Pascal-Francis
Medline
MEDLINE
MEDLINE (Ovid)
MEDLINE
MEDLINE
PubMed
CrossRef
MEDLINE - Academic
DatabaseTitle MEDLINE
Medline Complete
MEDLINE with Full Text
PubMed
MEDLINE (Ovid)
CrossRef
MEDLINE - Academic
DatabaseTitleList MEDLINE - Academic

MEDLINE

Database_xml – sequence: 1
  dbid: NPM
  name: PubMed
  url: https://proxy.k.utb.cz/login?url=http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed
  sourceTypes: Index Database
– sequence: 2
  dbid: EIF
  name: MEDLINE
  url: https://proxy.k.utb.cz/login?url=https://www.webofscience.com/wos/medline/basic-search
  sourceTypes: Index Database
DeliveryMethod fulltext_linktorsrc
Discipline Medicine
EISSN 1549-4713
EndPage 758
ExternalDocumentID 10_1016_j_ophtha_2011_09_045
22218146
25948569
S0161642011009316
1_s2_0_S0161642011009316
Genre Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Journal Article
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
GeographicLocations United States
GeographicLocations_xml – name: United States
GrantInformation_xml – fundername: American Glaucoma Society Clinician Scientist
– fundername: National Eye Institute K23 Mentored Clinician Scientist Award
  grantid: 1K23EY019511-01
– fundername: Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan Foundation
– fundername: Research to Prevent Blindness
– fundername: NEI NIH HHS
  grantid: 1K23EY019511-01
– fundername: NEI NIH HHS
  grantid: K23 EY019511
– fundername: NEI NIH HHS
  grantid: K23 EY019511-02
GroupedDBID -
08R
0R
1-
123
1B1
1P
1~5
29N
4.4
457
4G.
53G
55
5RE
5VS
7-5
71M
AAEDT
AAIAV
AALRI
AALRV
AAQFI
AAQQT
AAQXK
AAXUO
ABFLS
ABFRF
ABIID
ABLJU
ABMAC
ABOCM
ABPTK
ABQIS
ABWYI
ACGFO
ACGFS
ACIUM
ACNCT
ADPAM
AEFWE
AENEX
AEVXI
AFFNX
AFRHN
AFTJW
AGZHU
AITUG
AJUYK
ALMA_UNASSIGNED_HOLDINGS
ALXNB
BELOY
C5W
CS3
DU5
EBS
EFJIC
EJD
F5P
FDB
FEDTE
FGOYB
FO
GBLVA
GJ
HVGLF
HZ
IHE
IPNFZ
J1W
K
K-O
KOM
L7B
M27
M41
MO0
N4W
N9A
NQ-
O9-
OF-
OPF
OQ
P2P
R2-
RIG
ROL
RPZ
SDG
SEL
SES
SSZ
UHS
UNMZH
UV1
WH7
X7M
XH2
XPP
Z5R
ZA5
ZGI
ZXP
---
--K
.1-
.55
.FO
.GJ
0R~
1P~
AAEDW
ABCQX
ABJNI
ADMUD
AHPSJ
AMRAJ
HZ~
OQ~
AAUGY
IQODW
AKRWK
CGR
CUY
CVF
ECM
EIF
NPM
AAYXX
CITATION
7X8
ID FETCH-LOGICAL-c492t-7ba66e4e77e60301e505eb2bc65bf5673fdd1c2b26cea4eee12bf40cc3b77e63
ISSN 0161-6420
IngestDate Fri Aug 16 21:33:40 EDT 2024
Fri Aug 23 03:15:25 EDT 2024
Thu May 23 23:14:49 EDT 2024
Sun Oct 22 16:05:43 EDT 2023
Fri Feb 23 02:22:15 EST 2024
Thu Aug 18 18:35:47 EDT 2022
IsDoiOpenAccess false
IsOpenAccess true
IsPeerReviewed true
IsScholarly true
Issue 4
Keywords Glaucoma
Human
Protozoa
Eye disease
Open angle glaucoma
Use
Ciliata
Ophthalmology
Language English
License CC BY 4.0
Copyright © 2012 American Academy of Ophthalmology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
LinkModel OpenURL
MergedId FETCHMERGED-LOGICAL-c492t-7ba66e4e77e60301e505eb2bc65bf5673fdd1c2b26cea4eee12bf40cc3b77e63
Notes ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
OpenAccessLink https://europepmc.org/articles/pmc3319788?pdf=render
PMID 22218146
PQID 968109020
PQPubID 23479
PageCount 11
ParticipantIDs proquest_miscellaneous_968109020
crossref_primary_10_1016_j_ophtha_2011_09_045
pubmed_primary_22218146
pascalfrancis_primary_25948569
elsevier_sciencedirect_doi_10_1016_j_ophtha_2011_09_045
elsevier_clinicalkeyesjournals_1_s2_0_S0161642011009316
PublicationCentury 2000
PublicationDate 2012-04-01
PublicationDateYYYYMMDD 2012-04-01
PublicationDate_xml – month: 04
  year: 2012
  text: 2012-04-01
  day: 01
PublicationDecade 2010
PublicationPlace New York, NY
PublicationPlace_xml – name: New York, NY
– name: United States
PublicationTitle Ophthalmology (Rochester, Minn.)
PublicationTitleAlternate Ophthalmology
PublicationYear 2012
Publisher Elsevier Inc
Elsevier
Publisher_xml – name: Elsevier Inc
– name: Elsevier
References Deleón-Ortega, Arthur, McGwin (bib5) 2006; 47
(bib13) 2010
Lin, Singh, Jampel (bib15) 2007; 114
(bib14) 2010
Coleman, Yu, Rowe (bib9) 2005; 112
Park, Kim, Kee (bib16) 2005; 14
Schuman (bib11) 2008; 106
(bib8) 2006
Medeiros, Zangwill, Alencar (bib20) 2009; 50
Gardiner, Demirel (bib10) 2008; 115
Leung, Cheung, Weinreb (bib1) 2011; 118
Leung, Mohamed, Leung (bib17) 2006; 47
Ortega, Kakati, Girkin (bib18) 2009; 18
Rauscher, Sekhon, Feuer, Budenz (bib2) 2009; 18
Asrani, Edghill, Gupta, Meerhoff (bib3) 2010; 19
Jaffe, Caprioli (bib4) 2004; 137
Badalà, Nouri-Mahdavi, Raoof (bib6) 2007; 144
(bib7) 2006
Hillman (bib12) 1992
Siam, Gheith, de Barros (bib19) 2008; 39
Friedman, Nordstrom, Mozaffari, Quigley (bib21) 2005; 112
16039717 - Ophthalmology. 2005 Sep;112(9):1500-4
17908595 - Ophthalmology. 2007 Oct;114(10):1937-49
21093920 - Ophthalmology. 2011 Apr;118(4):763-7
17868631 - Am J Ophthalmol. 2007 Nov;144(5):724-32
19295369 - J Glaucoma. 2009 Mar;18(3):186-91
19815731 - Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2009 Dec;50(12):5741-8
15745765 - Ophthalmology. 2005 Mar;112(3):401-6
19277249 - Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc. 2008;106:426-58
19661819 - J Glaucoma. 2010 Apr-May;19(4):237-42
15870603 - J Glaucoma. 2005 Jun;14(3):210-4
18556958 - Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imaging. 2008 May-Jun;39(3):262-4
19041473 - Ophthalmology. 2008 Dec;115(12):2127-31
14700659 - Am J Ophthalmol. 2004 Jan;137(1):156-69
16877405 - Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2006 Aug;47(8):3374-80
19745664 - J Glaucoma. 2009 Sep;18(7):501-5
17122099 - Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2006 Dec;47(12):5171-6
(10.1016/j.ophtha.2011.09.045_bib7) 2006
Hillman (10.1016/j.ophtha.2011.09.045_bib12) 1992
Ortega (10.1016/j.ophtha.2011.09.045_bib18) 2009; 18
Rauscher (10.1016/j.ophtha.2011.09.045_bib2) 2009; 18
(10.1016/j.ophtha.2011.09.045_bib8) 2006
Park (10.1016/j.ophtha.2011.09.045_bib16) 2005; 14
Deleón-Ortega (10.1016/j.ophtha.2011.09.045_bib5) 2006; 47
Siam (10.1016/j.ophtha.2011.09.045_bib19) 2008; 39
Schuman (10.1016/j.ophtha.2011.09.045_bib11) 2008; 106
Coleman (10.1016/j.ophtha.2011.09.045_bib9) 2005; 112
(10.1016/j.ophtha.2011.09.045_bib14) 2010
Leung (10.1016/j.ophtha.2011.09.045_bib17) 2006; 47
Badalà (10.1016/j.ophtha.2011.09.045_bib6) 2007; 144
(10.1016/j.ophtha.2011.09.045_bib13) 2010
Friedman (10.1016/j.ophtha.2011.09.045_bib21) 2005; 112
Jaffe (10.1016/j.ophtha.2011.09.045_bib4) 2004; 137
Asrani (10.1016/j.ophtha.2011.09.045_bib3) 2010; 19
Medeiros (10.1016/j.ophtha.2011.09.045_bib20) 2009; 50
Lin (10.1016/j.ophtha.2011.09.045_bib15) 2007; 114
Leung (10.1016/j.ophtha.2011.09.045_bib1) 2011; 118
Gardiner (10.1016/j.ophtha.2011.09.045_bib10) 2008; 115
References_xml – volume: 47
  start-page: 3374
  year: 2006
  end-page: 3380
  ident: bib5
  article-title: Discrimination between glaucomatous and nonglaucomatous eyes using quantitative imaging devices and subjective optic nerve head assessment
  publication-title: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci
  contributor:
    fullname: McGwin
– start-page: 12
  year: 2010
  ident: bib14
  article-title: Preferred Practice Pattern
– volume: 115
  start-page: 2127
  year: 2008
  end-page: 2131
  ident: bib10
  article-title: Assessment of patient opinions of different clinical tests used in the management of glaucoma
  publication-title: Ophthalmology
  contributor:
    fullname: Demirel
– volume: 106
  start-page: 426
  year: 2008
  end-page: 458
  ident: bib11
  article-title: Spectral domain optical coherence tomography for glaucoma (an AOS thesis)
  publication-title: Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc
  contributor:
    fullname: Schuman
– volume: 18
  start-page: 501
  year: 2009
  end-page: 505
  ident: bib2
  article-title: Myopia affects retinal nerve fiber layer measurements as determined by optical coherence tomography
  publication-title: J Glaucoma
  contributor:
    fullname: Budenz
– year: 2006
  ident: bib7
  article-title: Physician ICD-9-CM 2006
– volume: 137
  start-page: 156
  year: 2004
  end-page: 169
  ident: bib4
  article-title: Optical coherence tomography to detect and manage retinal disease and glaucoma
  publication-title: Am J Ophthalmol
  contributor:
    fullname: Caprioli
– volume: 144
  start-page: 724
  year: 2007
  end-page: 732
  ident: bib6
  article-title: Optic disk and nerve fiber layer imaging to detect glaucoma
  publication-title: Am J Ophthalmol
  contributor:
    fullname: Raoof
– volume: 39
  start-page: 262
  year: 2008
  end-page: 264
  ident: bib19
  article-title: Limitations of the Heidelberg Retina Tomograph
  publication-title: Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imaging
  contributor:
    fullname: de Barros
– volume: 50
  start-page: 5741
  year: 2009
  end-page: 5748
  ident: bib20
  article-title: Detection of glaucoma progression with Stratus OCT retinal nerve fiber layer, optic nerve head, and macular thickness measurements
  publication-title: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci
  contributor:
    fullname: Alencar
– volume: 18
  start-page: 186
  year: 2009
  end-page: 191
  ident: bib18
  article-title: Artifacts on the optic nerve head analysis of the optical coherence tomography in glaucomatous and nonglaucomatous eyes
  publication-title: J Glaucoma
  contributor:
    fullname: Girkin
– year: 2006
  ident: bib8
  article-title: CPT 2006
– volume: 14
  start-page: 210
  year: 2005
  end-page: 214
  ident: bib16
  article-title: Evaluation of the influence of tilt of optic disc on the measurement of optic disc variables obtained by optical coherence tomography and confocal scanning laser ophthalmoscopy
  publication-title: J Glaucoma
  contributor:
    fullname: Kee
– volume: 118
  start-page: 763
  year: 2011
  end-page: 767
  ident: bib1
  article-title: Evaluation of retinal nerve fiber layer progression in glaucoma: a comparison between the fast and the regular retinal nerve fiber layer scans
  publication-title: Ophthalmology
  contributor:
    fullname: Weinreb
– volume: 112
  start-page: 401
  year: 2005
  end-page: 406
  ident: bib9
  article-title: Visual field testing in glaucoma Medicare beneficiaries before surgery
  publication-title: Ophthalmology
  contributor:
    fullname: Rowe
– volume: 114
  start-page: 1937
  year: 2007
  end-page: 1949
  ident: bib15
  article-title: Optic nerve head and retinal nerve fiber layer analysis: a report by the American Academy of Ophthalmology
  publication-title: Ophthalmology
  contributor:
    fullname: Jampel
– start-page: 133
  year: 1992
  end-page: 149
  ident: bib12
  article-title: Physicians' acquisition and use of new technology in an era of economic constraints
  publication-title: Technology and Health Care in an Era of Limits
  contributor:
    fullname: Hillman
– volume: 112
  start-page: 1500
  year: 2005
  end-page: 1504
  ident: bib21
  article-title: Glaucoma management among individuals enrolled in a single comprehensive insurance plan
  publication-title: Ophthalmology
  contributor:
    fullname: Quigley
– volume: 47
  start-page: 5171
  year: 2006
  end-page: 5176
  ident: bib17
  article-title: Retinal nerve fiber layer measurements in myopia: an optical coherence tomography study
  publication-title: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci
  contributor:
    fullname: Leung
– volume: 19
  start-page: 237
  year: 2010
  end-page: 242
  ident: bib3
  article-title: Optical coherence tomography errors in glaucoma
  publication-title: J Glaucoma
  contributor:
    fullname: Meerhoff
– start-page: 32
  year: 2010
  ident: bib13
  article-title: Preferred Practice Pattern
– year: 2006
  ident: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2011.09.045_bib7
– volume: 114
  start-page: 1937
  year: 2007
  ident: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2011.09.045_bib15
  article-title: Optic nerve head and retinal nerve fiber layer analysis: a report by the American Academy of Ophthalmology
  publication-title: Ophthalmology
  doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2007.07.005
  contributor:
    fullname: Lin
– volume: 106
  start-page: 426
  year: 2008
  ident: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2011.09.045_bib11
  article-title: Spectral domain optical coherence tomography for glaucoma (an AOS thesis)
  publication-title: Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc
  contributor:
    fullname: Schuman
– start-page: 12
  year: 2010
  ident: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2011.09.045_bib14
  article-title: Preferred Practice Pattern
– volume: 18
  start-page: 186
  year: 2009
  ident: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2011.09.045_bib18
  article-title: Artifacts on the optic nerve head analysis of the optical coherence tomography in glaucomatous and nonglaucomatous eyes
  publication-title: J Glaucoma
  doi: 10.1097/IJG.0b013e31818159cb
  contributor:
    fullname: Ortega
– volume: 118
  start-page: 763
  year: 2011
  ident: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2011.09.045_bib1
  article-title: Evaluation of retinal nerve fiber layer progression in glaucoma: a comparison between the fast and the regular retinal nerve fiber layer scans
  publication-title: Ophthalmology
  doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2010.08.014
  contributor:
    fullname: Leung
– start-page: 32
  year: 2010
  ident: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2011.09.045_bib13
  article-title: Preferred Practice Pattern
– volume: 112
  start-page: 1500
  year: 2005
  ident: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2011.09.045_bib21
  article-title: Glaucoma management among individuals enrolled in a single comprehensive insurance plan
  publication-title: Ophthalmology
  doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2005.02.030
  contributor:
    fullname: Friedman
– volume: 19
  start-page: 237
  year: 2010
  ident: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2011.09.045_bib3
  article-title: Optical coherence tomography errors in glaucoma
  publication-title: J Glaucoma
  doi: 10.1097/IJG.0b013e3181b21f99
  contributor:
    fullname: Asrani
– volume: 14
  start-page: 210
  year: 2005
  ident: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2011.09.045_bib16
  article-title: Evaluation of the influence of tilt of optic disc on the measurement of optic disc variables obtained by optical coherence tomography and confocal scanning laser ophthalmoscopy
  publication-title: J Glaucoma
  doi: 10.1097/01.ijg.0000159129.93085.96
  contributor:
    fullname: Park
– volume: 47
  start-page: 5171
  year: 2006
  ident: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2011.09.045_bib17
  article-title: Retinal nerve fiber layer measurements in myopia: an optical coherence tomography study
  publication-title: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci
  doi: 10.1167/iovs.06-0545
  contributor:
    fullname: Leung
– volume: 39
  start-page: 262
  year: 2008
  ident: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2011.09.045_bib19
  article-title: Limitations of the Heidelberg Retina Tomograph
  publication-title: Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imaging
  doi: 10.3928/15428877-20080501-16
  contributor:
    fullname: Siam
– volume: 50
  start-page: 5741
  year: 2009
  ident: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2011.09.045_bib20
  article-title: Detection of glaucoma progression with Stratus OCT retinal nerve fiber layer, optic nerve head, and macular thickness measurements
  publication-title: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci
  doi: 10.1167/iovs.09-3715
  contributor:
    fullname: Medeiros
– volume: 47
  start-page: 3374
  year: 2006
  ident: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2011.09.045_bib5
  article-title: Discrimination between glaucomatous and nonglaucomatous eyes using quantitative imaging devices and subjective optic nerve head assessment
  publication-title: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci
  doi: 10.1167/iovs.05-1239
  contributor:
    fullname: Deleón-Ortega
– year: 2006
  ident: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2011.09.045_bib8
– volume: 18
  start-page: 501
  year: 2009
  ident: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2011.09.045_bib2
  article-title: Myopia affects retinal nerve fiber layer measurements as determined by optical coherence tomography
  publication-title: J Glaucoma
  doi: 10.1097/IJG.0b013e318193c2be
  contributor:
    fullname: Rauscher
– volume: 137
  start-page: 156
  year: 2004
  ident: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2011.09.045_bib4
  article-title: Optical coherence tomography to detect and manage retinal disease and glaucoma
  publication-title: Am J Ophthalmol
  doi: 10.1016/S0002-9394(03)00792-X
  contributor:
    fullname: Jaffe
– volume: 144
  start-page: 724
  year: 2007
  ident: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2011.09.045_bib6
  article-title: Optic disk and nerve fiber layer imaging to detect glaucoma
  publication-title: Am J Ophthalmol
  doi: 10.1016/j.ajo.2007.07.010
  contributor:
    fullname: Badalà
– start-page: 133
  year: 1992
  ident: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2011.09.045_bib12
  article-title: Physicians' acquisition and use of new technology in an era of economic constraints
  contributor:
    fullname: Hillman
– volume: 112
  start-page: 401
  year: 2005
  ident: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2011.09.045_bib9
  article-title: Visual field testing in glaucoma Medicare beneficiaries before surgery
  publication-title: Ophthalmology
  doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2004.09.034
  contributor:
    fullname: Coleman
– volume: 115
  start-page: 2127
  year: 2008
  ident: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2011.09.045_bib10
  article-title: Assessment of patient opinions of different clinical tests used in the management of glaucoma
  publication-title: Ophthalmology
  doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2008.08.013
  contributor:
    fullname: Gardiner
SSID ssj0006634
Score 2.3163278
Snippet Purpose To assess trends in the use of ancillary diagnostic tests in the evaluation of patients with open-angle glaucoma (OAG) and glaucoma suspects over the...
To assess trends in the use of ancillary diagnostic tests in the evaluation of patients with open-angle glaucoma (OAG) and glaucoma suspects over the past...
PURPOSETo assess trends in the use of ancillary diagnostic tests in the evaluation of patients with open-angle glaucoma (OAG) and glaucoma suspects over the...
SourceID proquest
crossref
pubmed
pascalfrancis
elsevier
SourceType Aggregation Database
Index Database
Publisher
StartPage 748
SubjectTerms Biological and medical sciences
Diagnostic Techniques, Ophthalmological - trends
Female
Fluorescein Angiography - trends
Follow-Up Studies
Glaucoma and intraocular pressure
Glaucoma, Open-Angle - diagnosis
Humans
Male
Managed Care Programs - statistics & numerical data
Medical sciences
Middle Aged
Miscellaneous
Ocular Hypertension - diagnosis
Odds Ratio
Ophthalmology
Ophthalmology - trends
Optometry - trends
Practice Patterns, Physicians' - trends
Retrospective Studies
Tomography, Optical Coherence - trends
United States - epidemiology
Visual Field Tests - trends
Title Trends in Use of Ancillary Glaucoma Tests for Patients with Open-Angle Glaucoma from 2001 to 2009
URI https://www.clinicalkey.es/playcontent/1-s2.0-S0161642011009316
https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2011.09.045
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22218146
https://search.proquest.com/docview/968109020
Volume 119
hasFullText 1
inHoldings 1
isFullTextHit
isPrint
link http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwnV3bjtMwELXKroSQEOJOuaz8wFuVKnESp3ks19WuWiTowr5ZjuPQViWpmlQIfoTfZSZ2kpZlgeWlraLYST0n4_HkzDEhz5WbqFEYpE7mZb4TBDpwYh1ljlQQO3t6FKcca4cnU358Fpych-e93o8d1tK2Sobq-2_rSv7HqnAM7IpVslewbNspHIDfYF_4BAvD57_ZuCW0npmU_DhXuIvQ5tvg7Upu4ZJyMAO3X2suoBr_oqtnQyaJM84_r3R3bl1rgvQnjEjxhcZu6PpuPa_mcvXFiDbVmQe72Zah3-f5cCet8KHZRfOkKOdbOXg17HIEq6-G1T1dpPNFywiSH3WTXl3ppczTjRxM2lZTk6h9YYXCbZ4CCR8tvcWmLrnnwGrH3fO91l8udjMLtSeNjACnnZQjo-9-wd-b1MNyWNRDYBVZ46FrJCr35bV_mfZaMmLDc1sK04vAXoQbC-jlGjlkURzCqv5wfPr-02k7yUOgZmXjzZ9qqjJr6uDFu7ks6rm5liU8i5nZROXyVU4d7cxuk1t2mULHBnN3SE_nd8n1iSVi3CPSQI8ucgrQo0VGW-jRBk60hh4F6NEGehShRzvodeci9ChCj1YFfsf3yezN69nLY8fu1uGoIGaVEyWScx3oKNIc19kaYmudsETxMMlCHvlZmnqKJYwrLQOttceSLHCV8hNs4j8gB3mR60eEah2mPngWlUYMN8iTWmUskkxxHSZspPrEaQZTrI0mi_iTEfskakZcNPXGMEPq0j7KpfBEyYSLTEfuoTVRRzH2Pb7b0kakJtIUAMC_XPNoz7TtjTLURwp53Ce0sbUAj46v6WSui20pYpQIjGEZ1ycPDQa6xgwj8oA_vuIIPCE3ukfyKTmoNlv9DILpKjmywP4JaDjHSQ
link.rule.ids 315,786,790,27957,27958
linkProvider Library Specific Holdings
openUrl ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Trends+in+Use+of+Ancillary+Glaucoma+Tests+for+Patients+with+Open-Angle+Glaucoma+from+2001+to+2009&rft.jtitle=Ophthalmology+%28Rochester%2C+Minn.%29&rft.au=Stein%2C+Joshua+D.&rft.au=Talwar%2C+Nidhi&rft.au=LaVerne%2C+Alejandra+M.&rft.au=Nan%2C+Bin&rft.date=2012-04-01&rft.issn=0161-6420&rft.volume=119&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=748&rft.epage=758&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016%2Fj.ophtha.2011.09.045&rft.externalDBID=n%2Fa&rft.externalDocID=10_1016_j_ophtha_2011_09_045
thumbnail_m http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/image/custom?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcdn.clinicalkey.com%2Fck-thumbnails%2F01616420%2FS0161642011X00155%2Fcov150h.gif