FC
OpenClaw Reader
Feed-Claw
OptometryClin Exp OptomDOI available

Models of multidisciplinary team-based care involving optometrists in Australia and New Zealand: narrative review and synthesis of implementation issues

Clin Exp Optom . 2026 Apr 13:1-15. doi: 10.1080/08164622.2026.2624750. Online ahead of print. ABSTRACT CLINICAL RELEVANCE: There is potential to expand the number of collaborative care and multidisciplinary team-based care models that optometrists are involved in, working at ful…

Open original articleExtraction: feed_summaryCached 11 May 2026, 6:35 am
Actions
Reader

Clin Exp Optom. 2026 Apr 13:1-15. doi: 10.1080/08164622.2026.2624750. Online ahead of print.

ABSTRACT

CLINICAL RELEVANCE: There is potential to expand the number of collaborative care and multidisciplinary team-based care models that optometrists are involved in, working at full scope to deliver high quality patient care. Ongoing work to generate research evidence, change policy and secure long-term funding is needed to support implementation.

BACKGROUND: Implementation of new models of multidisciplinary team-based care or collaborative care can support quality healthcare delivery and the sustainability of future health systems.

METHODS: This narrative review synthesises research on models of multidisciplinary team-based care or collaborative care that involve optometrists in Australia and New Zealand. Outcomes related to patient health and experience, health service delivery including costs, and practitioner experience including workforce satisfaction were extracted from published evaluations. Additionally, barriers and facilitating factors to implementation were synthesised from identified studies.

RESULTS: In total, 12 models of care were identified, most were task shifting or task sharing models between optometry and hospital-based ophthalmology for managing eye conditions. These collaborative models were developed to address long waiting lists for hospital-based ophthalmology services, and their implementation resulted in a corresponding decrease in waiting times for appointments. However, patient health outcomes, patient, and practitioner experiences were seldom reported. In primary care settings, models of multidisciplinary team-based care (n =3) were generally well-received by patients and practitioners. However, more objective measures may help quantify the social and economic benefits of these models.

CONCLUSION: Despite the impetus for multidisciplinary team-based care, barriers to wider implementation persist. Implementation science can help identify strategies to overcome barriers to adopting evidence-based models of care. Future studies should incorporate economic evaluations, to inform advocacy and policy, to generate system-level change that support health organisations to deliver multidisciplinary team-based care. Finally, future work should consider embedding the patient perspective from outset to ensure that models of care are people-centred.

PMID:41974196 | DOI:10.1080/08164622.2026.2624750