Consultant clinical decision making in a glaucoma clinic

Abstract

Purpose To evaluate the repeatability of clinical decision-making by one glaucoma specialist and determine the influence of intraocular pressure (IOP) variation on those decisions. Patients and methods 40 patients were selected in whom consultant decisions were appropriate concerning management. These notes were reviewed on three separate occasions, each 3 months apart. The final examination was changed to include clinical findings with the IOP, either the same, ±2 or ±4 mm Hg different from the recorded IOP. A forced choice clinical decision was made on each occasion: continue present treatment, change medical treatment, or recommend surgery. The clinical decisions were then compared. Results Our results showed that when the presented IOP was the same there was an 80% agreement in the management decision (j 0.7). When the presented IOP was lowered by 2 or 4 mm Hg the agreement was 70 and 85%, respectively. When the presented IOP was increased by 2 or 4 mm Hg the agreement was 65 and 70%, respectively. None of these changes were significantly different. Similarly there was no evidence of a trend towards disagreement with IOP change (v 2 trend ¼ 1.3 P ¼ 0.25). Conclusions Algorithms for decision-making in glaucoma are complex. Large differences between specialists are recognised. This is a first report of within specialist agreement. The impact of within measurement error differences in single IOP measurements was negligible. Review of comments suggests that the main reason for disagreement was patient preference, which was absent with note review.

Virtual clinics in glaucoma care: face-to-face versus remote decision-making

“…The relatively low level of agreement in management decisions was not unusual. A single ophthalmologist showed some disagreement with their own management decisions when presented with cases a period after their initial clinical examination 13. There exists a diversity of clinical opinion among glaucomatologists on the best management options for individual patients 14…”

Diagnostic accuracy of a remote eye exam in measuring refractive errors and detecting cataract, glaucoma, and diabetic retinopathy

“…The sensitivity was 41.3% and the specificity of 95.8% for detecting glaucoma [25] . The level of agreement presented in these studies is relatively low, often because the early diagnosis of glaucoma is difficult and the criteria are rather subjective [25,26] . The outcome in our study was “glaucoma suspicion” instead of “glaucoma diagnosis”, because TeleOftalmo assessment did not include additional exams required to diagnose glaucoma (e.g., optical coherence tomography of the optic disc, computerized visual fields assessments).…”

Glaucoma referral refinement in Ireland: managing the sensitivity‐specificity paradox in optometric practice

“…Some amount of disagreement in relation to glaucoma is to be expected from the scheme. It is well recognised that decision making algorithms in glaucoma are complex, and that even glaucoma specialist ophthalmic consultants exhibit a wide range of agreement with each other, and even themselves, when diagnosing or managing the condition . The most common area of disagreement was between the discharge and monitor groups, likely due to the ambiguity in these suspect cases.…”

“…It is well recognised that decision making algorithms in glaucoma are complex, and that even glaucoma specialist ophthalmic consultants exhibit a wide range of agreement with each other, and even themselves, when diagnosing or managing the condition. 49 The most common area of disagreement was between the discharge and monitor groups, likely due to the ambiguity in these suspect cases. There was one occasion where a patient was non-conservatively marked for discharge by the optometrist but subsequently referred to ophthalmology by the scheme's supervising ophthalmologist.…”