PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
February 12, 2026Acta Ophthalmologica0 citationsOpen Access

Non‐physician delivered intravitreal injection service: A systematic review of safety, implementation, training and patient experience

View Full Paper
TLTorben LaursenHBHaris BralicJGJakob Grauslund

Key Points

  • To assess the safety, implementation, training, and patient experiences of non-physician delivered intravitreal injections.
  • Systematic review of literature from 13 databases
  • Inclusion of studies on anti-VEGF injections by non-physicians
  • Qualitative review based on themes of safety, implementation, training, and patient experience
  • Low complication rates for endophthalmitis (0.015%-0.07%) comparable to physician-led services
  • Increased clinical capacity by 25%-85%
  • Reduced waiting times and costs
  • High patient satisfaction and acceptance reported

Abstract

Abstract The global demand for intravitreal anti‐vascular endothelial growth factor (anti‐VEGF) therapy continues to rise, straining ophthalmic capacity worldwide. Task shifting from physicians to trained non‐physician healthcare professionals has emerged as a potential strategy to expand service delivery. This systematic review summarizes current evidence on the safety, implementation, training and patient experiences associated with non‐physician‐delivered intravitreal injection services. We systematically searched 13 scientific literature databases for studies of anti‐VEGF injections performed by non‐physicians. Data were extracted on safety outcomes, implementation, training, supervision and patient‐reported experience. Results from individual studies were qualitatively reviewed according to these four organizational themes. Sixteen studies comprising 100 150 injections were included, primarily from the United Kingdom and Scandinavia. All injectors completed structured training under an ophthalmologist's supervision. Complication rates were very low, including 0.015%–0.07% for endophthalmitis which were comparable to physician‐led benchmarks. Implementation of non‐physician‐delivered intravitreal injection services increased clinical capacity by 25%–85%, reduced waiting times and costs, and maintained safety and efficiency. Patients reported high satisfaction, confidence and acceptance of non‐physician‐delivered injections. Non‐physician‐delivered intravitreal injection services are safe, feasible and well accepted when supported by structured training and robust governance frameworks. This task‐shifting model offers a scalable solution to meet growing global demand for anti‐VEGF therapy. Standardized international training and certification frameworks may further enhance safety and sustainability.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Laursen et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/698d6f5f5be6419ac0d5530dhttps://doi.org/10.1111/aos.70104
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1The incidence and prevalence of diabetic macular edema and proliferative diabetic retinopathy, their progression to visual impairment and patterns in their intravitreal treatment in the Finnish population2024 · 10 citations
  2. 2Safety and efficacy of nurse led intravitreal injection service with Precivia® injection assist device2021 · 6 citations
  3. 3Cost-Utility of Anti–Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Treatment for Macular Edema Secondary to Central Retinal Vein Occlusion2020 · 14 citations
  4. 4Global prevalence of age-related macular degeneration and disease burden projection for 2020 and 2040: a systematic review and meta-analysis2014 · 5,417 citations
  5. 5Correction: Design, implementation, and evaluation of a nurse-led intravitreal injection programme for retinal diseases in Singapore2020 · 2 citations