Federally Qualified Health Centers as a Model to Improve Vision Health: A Systematic Review.

IMPORTANCE

Disparities in eye health are associated with lower-income and minoritized populations, many of whom seek care at federally qualified health centers (FQHCs).

OBJECTIVE

To examine the literature addressing vision and eye health care provided at FQHCs, identify barriers to providing care at FQHCs, and highlight recommendations on how FQHCs can decrease disparities in eye health.

EVIDENCE REVIEW

A systematic review of Embase, SCOPUS, and PubMed was performed, and articles regarding eye and vision health at FQHCs within the US published between January 1, 1965, and July 14, 2023, were included. This review was conducted using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Structured data and case studies were extracted and collated using an a priori method to reduce bias.

FINDINGS

The systematic review yielded 423 unique articles, with 43 meeting inclusion criteria. Only 18.3% to 29% of FQHCs reported on-site vision services with the remainder relying on external referrals to vision specialists. Primary eye conditions evaluated included diabetic retinopathy (26 studies), general eye health (11 studies), and glaucoma (6 studies). Telehealth vision initiatives were an important method to expand access (18 studies). Other topics included economic analysis (5 studies) and policy suggestions (3 studies) to increase vision services at FQHCs. Systemic barriers to accessing care at FQHCs were the lack of eye clinicians available to provide services, the cost of resources, and limited reimbursement to implement screening programs. Patient barriers to accessing care included financial constraints for specialist care, limited awareness of the importance of eye examinations, and difficulty navigating the insurance system.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Findings of this systematic review suggest that FQHCs are well positioned to increase vision services and thus improve vision health equity, serving populations who are at a higher risk for vision disorders. Results find systemic and patient-level barriers to vision health that may need to be addressed. Policy leaders could leverage existing gaps for purposeful advocacy, set standards and metrics for vision health at FQHCs, promote novel models of care, and encourage collaboration of eye clinicians with partnering FQHCs.