To the Editor:

The recent review by Harper et al. on glaucoma care pathways looked at the virtual glaucoma clinic (VGC) and stated that “Clinical leads largely rate…the perception of patients’ acceptability to be at least equivalent to standard care” [1]. We have recently looked at the question of patient perceptions of our local VGC and how it compares with standard care i.e. traditional doctor-delivered clinics.

A Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire was sent out to 118 patients who had attended at least both one VGC and one traditional glaucoma clinic at The Royal Eye Infirmary, Plymouth. Sixty-eight responses were received and analysed in March 2020 (Table 1).

Table 1 Patient satisfaction of the virtual glaucoma clinic.
Full size table

Overall, 95% felt that the waiting times were the same or better than a traditional clinic. Overall, 97% of patients were satisfied or very satisfied with the thoroughness of the VGC. A total of 85% were satisfied or very satisfied with the information provided to them in the follow up letter from the clinician with 94% of patients feeling that the information was the same or better when compared with a traditional clinic. Overall, 98% of patients felt that the VGC was the same as or better than a traditional clinic (Fig. 1).

Fig. 1: Overall, 98% of patients felt that the VGC was the same as or better than a traditional clinic.
figure 1

Patient satisfaction of the virtual glaucoma clinic in comparison with a traditional clinic.

Full size image

Most comments were positive, highlighting the quick and efficient service. The negative comments arose from not receiving a feedback letter from the clinician, distant travel to the clinic and only one patient was disappointed at not being able to ask a doctor questions.

Our study therefore presents good evidence that patients feel that the VGC is at least as good as the traditional clinic and in many aspects better than the doctor-led clinic.