Utilization and Abandonment of Low Vision Devices Prescribed on a Mobile Clinic

Micaela Gobeille, Alexis G. Malkin, Richard Jamara, Nicole C. Ross

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

SIGNIFICANCE Device utilization and abandonment for patients seen on a mobile clinic are explored. Findings are informative for resource allocation in a novel low vision rehabilitation (LVR) delivery model. This study also explores the relationships between device abandonment and LVR patient-reported functional outcomes. PURPOSE This prospective cohort study investigated low vision device utilization and abandonment in a novel mobile clinic delivery model. METHODS A device abandonment questionnaire was administered by telephone 3 months and 1 year after mobile clinic LVR. Participants (n = 65) had previously met the U.S. definition of legal blindness and were prescribed a total of 154 devices at their low vision consultative visits. Trends in device utilization and correlations with clinical and demographic participant characteristics, as well as functional outcomes as assessed by Massof Activity Inventory, are explored. RESULTS An average of 2.6 device recommendations were made per participant. Digital magnification, optical magnifiers, and filters were most frequently recommended. At 3 months, 29% of participants abandoned at least one device, although only 17% of received devices were abandoned. There was no significant difference in the number of devices used, abandoned, or not received at 3 months versus 1 year after LVR. Devices prescribed for reading goals were most frequently used and least often abandoned, whereas glare control and distance magnification devices were more frequently abandoned. Neither patient characteristics nor Massof Activity Inventory change score was predictive of device abandonment. There was no significant difference in the odds of device abandonment in comparison with a previous study that assessed academic outpatient LVR clinics using the same questionnaire. CONCLUSIONS Although more device recommendations are given per patient on the mobile clinic, there is no significant difference in device abandonment for patients seen on the mobile clinic versus other outpatient LVR delivery models.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)859-864
Number of pages6
JournalOptometry and Vision Science
Volume95
Issue number9
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 1 2018
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Mobile Health Units
Low Vision
Equipment and Supplies
Rehabilitation
Refusal to Treat
Outpatients
Glare

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Ophthalmology
  • Optometry

Cite this

Utilization and Abandonment of Low Vision Devices Prescribed on a Mobile Clinic. / Gobeille, Micaela; Malkin, Alexis G.; Jamara, Richard; Ross, Nicole C.

In: Optometry and Vision Science, Vol. 95, No. 9, 01.09.2018, p. 859-864.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Gobeille, Micaela ; Malkin, Alexis G. ; Jamara, Richard ; Ross, Nicole C. / Utilization and Abandonment of Low Vision Devices Prescribed on a Mobile Clinic. In: Optometry and Vision Science. 2018 ; Vol. 95, No. 9. pp. 859-864.
@article{52f7ae0f9a7c40d782da54fb6ecf433e,
title = "Utilization and Abandonment of Low Vision Devices Prescribed on a Mobile Clinic",
abstract = "SIGNIFICANCE Device utilization and abandonment for patients seen on a mobile clinic are explored. Findings are informative for resource allocation in a novel low vision rehabilitation (LVR) delivery model. This study also explores the relationships between device abandonment and LVR patient-reported functional outcomes. PURPOSE This prospective cohort study investigated low vision device utilization and abandonment in a novel mobile clinic delivery model. METHODS A device abandonment questionnaire was administered by telephone 3 months and 1 year after mobile clinic LVR. Participants (n = 65) had previously met the U.S. definition of legal blindness and were prescribed a total of 154 devices at their low vision consultative visits. Trends in device utilization and correlations with clinical and demographic participant characteristics, as well as functional outcomes as assessed by Massof Activity Inventory, are explored. RESULTS An average of 2.6 device recommendations were made per participant. Digital magnification, optical magnifiers, and filters were most frequently recommended. At 3 months, 29{\%} of participants abandoned at least one device, although only 17{\%} of received devices were abandoned. There was no significant difference in the number of devices used, abandoned, or not received at 3 months versus 1 year after LVR. Devices prescribed for reading goals were most frequently used and least often abandoned, whereas glare control and distance magnification devices were more frequently abandoned. Neither patient characteristics nor Massof Activity Inventory change score was predictive of device abandonment. There was no significant difference in the odds of device abandonment in comparison with a previous study that assessed academic outpatient LVR clinics using the same questionnaire. CONCLUSIONS Although more device recommendations are given per patient on the mobile clinic, there is no significant difference in device abandonment for patients seen on the mobile clinic versus other outpatient LVR delivery models.",
author = "Micaela Gobeille and Malkin, {Alexis G.} and Richard Jamara and Ross, {Nicole C.}",
year = "2018",
month = "9",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1097/OPX.0000000000001267",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "95",
pages = "859--864",
journal = "Optometry and Vision Science",
issn = "1040-5488",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "9",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Utilization and Abandonment of Low Vision Devices Prescribed on a Mobile Clinic

AU - Gobeille, Micaela

AU - Malkin, Alexis G.

AU - Jamara, Richard

AU - Ross, Nicole C.

PY - 2018/9/1

Y1 - 2018/9/1

N2 - SIGNIFICANCE Device utilization and abandonment for patients seen on a mobile clinic are explored. Findings are informative for resource allocation in a novel low vision rehabilitation (LVR) delivery model. This study also explores the relationships between device abandonment and LVR patient-reported functional outcomes. PURPOSE This prospective cohort study investigated low vision device utilization and abandonment in a novel mobile clinic delivery model. METHODS A device abandonment questionnaire was administered by telephone 3 months and 1 year after mobile clinic LVR. Participants (n = 65) had previously met the U.S. definition of legal blindness and were prescribed a total of 154 devices at their low vision consultative visits. Trends in device utilization and correlations with clinical and demographic participant characteristics, as well as functional outcomes as assessed by Massof Activity Inventory, are explored. RESULTS An average of 2.6 device recommendations were made per participant. Digital magnification, optical magnifiers, and filters were most frequently recommended. At 3 months, 29% of participants abandoned at least one device, although only 17% of received devices were abandoned. There was no significant difference in the number of devices used, abandoned, or not received at 3 months versus 1 year after LVR. Devices prescribed for reading goals were most frequently used and least often abandoned, whereas glare control and distance magnification devices were more frequently abandoned. Neither patient characteristics nor Massof Activity Inventory change score was predictive of device abandonment. There was no significant difference in the odds of device abandonment in comparison with a previous study that assessed academic outpatient LVR clinics using the same questionnaire. CONCLUSIONS Although more device recommendations are given per patient on the mobile clinic, there is no significant difference in device abandonment for patients seen on the mobile clinic versus other outpatient LVR delivery models.

AB - SIGNIFICANCE Device utilization and abandonment for patients seen on a mobile clinic are explored. Findings are informative for resource allocation in a novel low vision rehabilitation (LVR) delivery model. This study also explores the relationships between device abandonment and LVR patient-reported functional outcomes. PURPOSE This prospective cohort study investigated low vision device utilization and abandonment in a novel mobile clinic delivery model. METHODS A device abandonment questionnaire was administered by telephone 3 months and 1 year after mobile clinic LVR. Participants (n = 65) had previously met the U.S. definition of legal blindness and were prescribed a total of 154 devices at their low vision consultative visits. Trends in device utilization and correlations with clinical and demographic participant characteristics, as well as functional outcomes as assessed by Massof Activity Inventory, are explored. RESULTS An average of 2.6 device recommendations were made per participant. Digital magnification, optical magnifiers, and filters were most frequently recommended. At 3 months, 29% of participants abandoned at least one device, although only 17% of received devices were abandoned. There was no significant difference in the number of devices used, abandoned, or not received at 3 months versus 1 year after LVR. Devices prescribed for reading goals were most frequently used and least often abandoned, whereas glare control and distance magnification devices were more frequently abandoned. Neither patient characteristics nor Massof Activity Inventory change score was predictive of device abandonment. There was no significant difference in the odds of device abandonment in comparison with a previous study that assessed academic outpatient LVR clinics using the same questionnaire. CONCLUSIONS Although more device recommendations are given per patient on the mobile clinic, there is no significant difference in device abandonment for patients seen on the mobile clinic versus other outpatient LVR delivery models.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85052686612&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85052686612&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/OPX.0000000000001267

DO - 10.1097/OPX.0000000000001267

M3 - Article

C2 - 30169360

AN - SCOPUS:85052686612

VL - 95

SP - 859

EP - 864

JO - Optometry and Vision Science

JF - Optometry and Vision Science

SN - 1040-5488

IS - 9

ER -