Executive summary

Glaucoma is a chronic, progressive eye disease and a leading cause of irreversible sight loss in the UK, accounting for around 10% of sight impairment registrations. It affects approximately 2% of adults over 40, rising to around 10% of those over 75, and the number of people with glaucoma is projected to increase by over 10% in the next decade due to an ageing population.

The condition is typically asymptomatic in its early stages, with over half of cases undiagnosed. Most suspected glaucoma is identified through sight testing in primary care optometry, yet diagnostic tests have limited predictive value in low-prevalence populations. As a result, between 20% and 65% of referrals to hospital eye services (HES) are historically discharged at first visit.

Glaucoma currently accounts for approximately 20-25% of all HES outpatient activity. Combined with longstanding hospital workforce shortages, rising demand for follow-up and elective care backlogs, this has led to delays in diagnosis and treatment, increasing the risk of avoidable and irreversible sight loss. Organisations such as NICE and the Royal College of Ophthalmologists have highlighted the need for new care models that better utilise primary care capacity while maintaining patient safety. Glaucoma care represents a clear example of where current outpatient models are not sustainable and where pathway redesign can directly support system priorities for integration, prevention and future demand.

The case for change: alignment with commissioning priorities

Integrated, local care

Evidence shows that optometrists can safely undertake referral filtering, monitoring and management of low-risk ocular hypertension (OHT) and stable glaucoma, with clinical decision-making comparable to hospital-based care. Optometry-led glaucoma referral filtering services (GRFS) and community shared care pathways enable care to be delivered closer to home, while remaining fully integrated with secondary care through agreed
protocols, oversight and governance. These pathways strengthen collaboration between primary and secondary care, improve access and choice for patients, and make better use of the wider eye care workforce. This supports local models of care and reduces over-reliance on hospital outpatient clinics for stable and low-risk activity.

Recovery and transformation to sustainable outpatient care

GRFS directly support outpatient efficiency by refining referrals to hospitals. Across multiple UK models, evidence demonstrates that these services:

  • substantially reduce false-positive referrals and first-visit discharges
  • prevent 40-75% of onward referrals to HES, depending on service design
  • release significant volumes of outpatient capacity

Enhanced case-finding, referral refinement and virtual review models show particularly strong performance, with high agreement between optometrists and ophthalmologists and very low false-negative rates. Some services have released thousands of HES appointments. Shared care pathways further support outpatient recovery and transformation by shifting long-term follow-up of stable and low-risk patients out of hospital settings. This reduces follow-up backlogs and enables HES to prioritise patients with complex disease or high risk of vision loss: directly supporting elective care recovery and safe waiting list management.

Prevention and early diagnosis

Given that glaucoma-related vision loss is irreversible, prevention and early diagnosis are critical. GRFS improve early detection by:

  • increasing the proportion of true-positive referrals reaching HES
  • reducing delays caused by unnecessary hospital appointments
  • supporting timely escalation for those at genuine risk

In particular, repeat measures services allow equivocal findings from sight tests to be clarified and have been shown to avoid up to three quarters of suspected glaucoma or ocular hypertension referrals without compromising safety. By improving referral quality and timeliness, these pathways reduce the risk of preventable sight loss and associated long-term health and social care costs.

Population health management and reducing unwarranted variation in England

Access to GRFS and shared care pathways is currently inconsistent across England, contributing to unwarranted variation in referral quality, waiting times and outcomes. This variation disproportionately affects people in deprived communities and ethnic minority groups, who are at higher risk of advanced disease at presentation. Standardised commissioning of community-based glaucoma pathways would enable integrated care boards (ICBs) to achieve population health management principles by:

  • planning services around population need and risk
  • targeting areas with poor access or late presentation
  • reducing postcode variation in pathways and outcomes

These models provide system leaders with practical levers to improve equity, consistency and outcomes at scale.

Existing glaucoma services in Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales

Health policymakers should maintain existing GRFS in Northern Ireland (NI), Scotland and Wales, making full use of the optometry workforce and supporting those with advanced qualifications to deliver more care closer to home. Roll out of the new Community Glaucoma Service in Scotland and WGOS4 glaucoma monitoring services in Wales should continue to be supported. Shared care pathways beyond OHT patients should be introduced in NI to help improve patient outcomes.

Regular clinical audits and the publication of safety and patient-reported outcomes are required to grow the evidence base for delivering safe and effective care.

Optimal use of resources

The evidence base demonstrates that optometry-led GRFS and shared care pathways are safe, effective and acceptable to patients, with outcomes comparable to hospital care for appropriate cohorts. Both referral filtering and shared care models provide long-term system benefits, including released hospital capacity, reduced delays, improved flow and better outcomes for high-risk patients. These pathways ensure care is delivered in the most appropriate setting, maximise workforce skills, and support long-term system sustainability in the context of rising demand.

Patient experience and wider benefits

Patient satisfaction with both GRFS and shared care pathways is consistently high. Patients value shorter waiting times, reduced travel, greater convenience and improved communication. Community-based care also offers environmental benefits through reduced travel and lower carbon emissions, aligning with broader national environmental sustainability goals.

Conclusion

The evidence is clear that maintaining hospital-only glaucoma pathways is not viable. Rising demand, constrained hospital capacity and unwarranted variation create increasing risks to patient outcomes and system sustainability. Optometry-led glaucoma referral filtering services and shared, community-based pathways for low-risk patients offer a proven, scalable solution that aligns directly with health systems’ priorities for integrated, local care, recovery of outpatient care, prevention and early diagnosis, population health management and optimal use of resources. These models are not an incremental improvement but a strategic shift in how long-term eye conditions should be managed: releasing hospital capacity, protecting patients from avoidable harm and creating a more resilient eye care system fit for an ageing population.

Evidence review

Conclusions

UK nations have a significant opportunity to help manage the increasing number of glaucoma cases and limited HES capacity58. This can be achieved by supporting all optometrists to use their core skills to prevent referral initiation, and utilising the capacity afforded by optometrists with higher qualifications in primary care to further prevent onward referral of suspected cases to HES and manage low-risk glaucoma cases in the community. While such services are being rolled out in Wales and Scotland, full coverage is still to be achieved (at the time of writing) and full shared care services are yet to be commissioned in Northern Ireland. England has variable and limited availability of both GRFS and shared care pathways. Therefore, there are still opportunities to improve HES capacity and patient outcomes.

It is evident that GRFS and community shared care pathways are safe and effective, significantly reducing the burden on HES, with clinical quality comparable to hospital-based clinicians. Given the current ophthalmologist workforce shortages and HES capacity issues, these pathways release HES capacity to focus on patients in greatest need, reduce waiting times and help prevent avoidable sight loss due to delays in accessing glaucoma treatment. Patients benefit from a wider choice of locations for services, reduced travel time and distance, and have a high level of satisfaction with the care provided. This aligns with broader environmental sustainability needs and broad national health systems’ goals of moving care into the community and improving integration between primary and secondary care. Local planning with a whole system view to selectively commission community enhanced case-finding/referral services and shared care management pathways will enable a more resilient national eye care system fit to meet the growing needs of each nation’s aging population.

Download

  1. Stein, J. D., Khawaja, A. P., & Weizer, J. S. (2021). Glaucoma in adults—screening, diagnosis, and management: a review. Jama, 325(2), 164-174
  2. Hamid, S., Desai, P., Hysi, P., Burr, J. M., & Khawaja, A. P. (2022). Population screening for glaucoma in UK: current recommendations and future directions. Eye, 36(3), 504-509
  3. Allison, K., Patel, D., & Alabi, O. (2020). Epidemiology of glaucoma: the past, present, and predictions for the future. Cureus, 12(11)
  4. Stuart, K. V., de Vries, V. A., Schuster, A. K., Yu, Y., van der Heide, F. C., Delcourt, C., ... & Maastricht Study Consortium. (2025). Prevalence of Glaucoma in Europe and Projections to 2050: Findings from the European Eye Epidemiology (E3) Consortium. Ophthalmology.
  5. Harper, R. A., Gunn, P. J., Spry, P. G., Fenerty, C. H., & Lawrenson, J. G. (2020). Care pathways for glaucoma detection and monitoring in the UK. Eye, 34(1), 89-102
  6. Baker, H., Ratnarajan, G., Harper, R. A., Edgar, D. F., & Lawrenson, J. G. (2016). Effectiveness of UK optometric enhanced eye care services: a realist review of the literature. Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics, 36(5), 545-557
  7. UK Eye Care Data Hub (Accessed 06/01/25)
  8. Sheldrick, J. H., Ng, C., Austin, D. J., & Rosenthal, A. R. (1994). An analysis of referral routes and diagnostic accuracy in cases of suspected glaucoma. Ophthalmic epidemiology, 1(1), 31-39
  9. Bowling, B., Chen, S. D. M., & Salmon, J. F. (2005). Outcomes of referrals by community optometrists to a hospital glaucoma service. British Journal of Ophthalmology, 89(9), 1102-1104
  10. Burr, J. M., Mowatt, G., Hernández, R. A., Siddiqui, M. A. R., Cook, J. A., Lourenco, T., ... & Grant, A. M. (2007). The clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of screening for open angle glaucoma: a systematic review and economic evaluation
  11. Harper, R., Henson, D., & Reeves, B. C. (2000). Appraising evaluations of screening/diagnostic tests: the importance of the study populations. British Journal of Ophthalmology, 84(10), 1198-1202
  12. Harper, R. (2011). Glaucoma and optometry: recognition, challenges and opportunities. Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics, 31(4), 327-329
  13. The Royal College of Ophthalmologists (2017). The Way Forward: Options to help meet demand for the current and future care of patients with eye disease – Glaucoma (Accessed 27/11/25)
  14. Foot, B., & MacEwen, C. (2017). Surveillance of sight loss due to delay in ophthalmic treatment or review: frequency, cause and outcome. Eye, 31(5), 771-775
  15. NICE guideline NG81 (2022): Glaucoma diagnosis and management (Accessed 27/11/25)
  16. Parkins, D. J., & Edgar, D. F. (2011). Comparison of the effectiveness of two enhanced glaucoma referral schemes. Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics, 31(4), 343-352
  17. Ang, G. S., Ng, W. S., & Azuara-Blanco, A. (2009). The influence of the new general ophthalmic services (GOS) contract in optometrist referrals for glaucoma in Scotland. Eye, 23(2), 351-355
  18. El-Assal, K., Foulds, J., Dobson, S., & Sanders, R. (2015). A comparative study of glaucoma referrals in Southeast Scotland: effect of the new general ophthalmic service contract, Eyecare integration pilot programme and NICE guidelines. BMC ophthalmology, 15(1), 172
  19. Henson, D. B., Spencer, A. F., Harper, R., & Cadman, E. J. (2003). Community refinement of glaucoma referrals. Eye, 17(1), 21-26
  20. Gunn, P. J., Marks, J. R., Konstantakopoulou, E., Edgar, D. F., Lawrenson, J. G., Roberts, S. A., ... & Harper, R. A. (2019). Clinical effectiveness of the Manchester glaucoma enhanced referral scheme. British Journal of Ophthalmology, 103(8), 1066-1071
  21. Forbes, H., Sutton, M., Edgar, D. F., Lawrenson, J., Spencer, A. F., Fenerty, C., & Harper, R. Impact of the Manchester glaucoma enhanced referral scheme on NHS costs. BMJ Open Ophthalmol. 2019; 4: e000278
  22. Devarajan, N., Williams, G. S., Hopes, M., OSullivan, D., & Jones, D. (2011). The Carmarthenshire Glaucoma Referral Refinement Scheme, a safe and efficient screening service. Eye, 25(1), 43-49
  23. Bourne, R. R. A., French, K. A., Chang, L., Borman, A. D., Hingorani, M., & Newsom, W. D. (2010). Can a community optometrist-based referral refinement scheme reduce false-positive glaucoma hospital referrals without compromising quality of care? The community and hospital allied network glaucoma evaluation scheme (CHANGES). Eye, 24(5), 881-887
  24. Ratnarajan, G., Kean, J., French, K., Parker, M., & Bourne, R. (2015). The false negative rate and the role for virtual review in a nationally evaluated glaucoma referral refinement scheme. Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics, 35(5), 577-581.
  25. Ratnarajan, G., Newsom, W., Vernon, S. A., Fenerty, C., Henson, D., Spencer, F., ... & Bourne, R. The effectiveness of schemes that refine referrals between primary and secondary care—the UK experience with glaucoma referrals: the Health Innovation & Education Cluster (HIEC) glaucoma pathways project. BMJ Open.2013; 3: e002715
  26. Keenan, J., Shahid, H., Bourne, R. R., White, A. J., & Martin, K. R. (2015). Cambridge Community Optometry Glaucoma Scheme. Clinical & experimental ophthalmology, 43(3), 221-227
  27. Trikha, S., Macgregor, C., Jeffery, M., & Kirwan, J. (2012). The Portsmouth-based glaucoma refinement scheme: a role for virtual clinics in the future?. Eye, 26(10), 1288-1294
  28. Mathew, R. G., Beddow, C. J., Raison, H., & Sim, D. A. (2021). Project Panopia: cost-effective model for glaucoma referral refinement from community optometrists without the need for repeat testing. Eye, 35(4), 1056-1060
  29. Gray, S. F., Spencer, I. C., Spry, P. G., Brookes, S. T., Baker, I. A., Peters, T. J., ... & Easty, D. L. (1997). The Bristol Shared Care Glaucoma Study–validity of measurements and patient satisfaction. Journal of Public Health, 19(4), 431-436
  30. Spry, P. G. D., Spencer, I. C., Sparrow, J. M., Peters, T. J., Brookes, S. T., Gray, S., ... & Easty, D. L. (1999). The Bristol Shared Care Glaucoma Study: reliability of community optometric and hospital eye service test measures. British journal of ophthalmology, 83(6), 707-712
  31. Gray, S. F., Spry, P. G., Brookes, S. T., Peters, T. J., Spencer, I. C., Baker, I. A., ... & Easty, D. L. (2000). The Bristol shared care glaucoma study: outcome at follow up at 2 years. British Journal of Ophthalmology, 84(5), 456-463
  32. Syam, P., Rughani, K., Vardy, S. J., Rimmer, T., Fitt, A., Husain, T., ... & Ramirez-Florez, S. (2010). The Peterborough scheme for community specialist optometrists in glaucoma: a feasibility study. Eye, 24(7), 1156-1164
  33. Roberts, H. W., Rughani, K., Syam, P., Dhingra, S., & Ramirez-Florez, S. (2015). The Peterborough scheme for community specialist optometrists in glaucoma: results of 4 years of a two-tiered community-based assessment and follow-up service. Current Eye Research, 40(7), 690-696
  34. Mandalos, A., Bourne, R., French, K., Newsom, W., & Chang, L. (2012). Shared care of patients with ocular hypertension in the Community and Hospital Allied Network Glaucoma Evaluation Scheme (CHANGES). Eye, 26(4), 564-567
  35. Dinsdale, M., Fenerty, C. H., Craven, W., Ireland, R., Gunn, P. J., Hilton, R., ... & Harper, R. A. (2024). Primary Eyecare Glaucoma Service (PEGS): a mixed methods service evaluation. Eye, 38(18), 3481-3487
  36. Konstantakopoulou, E., Harper, R. A., Edgar, D. F., & Lawrenson, J. G. (2014). A qualitative study of stakeholder views regarding participation in locally commissioned enhanced optometric services. BMJ open, 4(5), e004781
  37. Baker, H., Harper, R. A., Edgar, D. F., & Lawrenson, J. G. (2016). Multi-stakeholder perspectives of locally commissioned enhanced optometric services. BMJ open, 6(10), e011934
  38. Gunn, P. J., Read, S., Dickinson, C., Fenerty, C. H., & Harper, R. A. (2024). Providing capacity in glaucoma care using trained and accredited optometrists: A qualitative evaluation. Eye, 38(5), 994-1004
  39. HealthWatch (2025). A strain on sight: waiting for NHS specialist eye care. (Accessed 29/11/25)
  40. Aziz, K., & Friedman, D. S. (2018). Tonometers—which one should I use?. Eye, 32(5), 931-937
  41. Sheehan, W., Adams, D., Wells, C., & Booth, A. (2011). Does Goldmann applanation tonometry performed by community optometrists reduce referrals? A pilot study. British Journal of Ophthalmology, 95(2), 295-295
  42. NHS Scotland. Supplementary eye examinations (Accessed 04/12/25)
  43. NHS Wales. Eye care Wales: WGOS Level 2 Band 2 (Accessed 04/12/25)
  44. Health and Social care Northern Ireland. Northern Ireland primary care optometry enhanced service: intraocular pressure repeat measures (Level I ES) (Accessed 06/01/26)
  45. Fu, D. J., Ademisoye, E., Shih, V., McNaught, A. I., & Khawaja, A. P. (2023). Burden of glaucoma in the United Kingdom: a multicenter analysis of United Kingdom glaucoma services. Ophthalmology Glaucoma, 6(1), 106-115
  46. The College of Optometrists (2022). Designing glaucoma care using GLAUC-STRAT-FAST (Accessed 04/12/25)
  47. Ryan, B., Jones, M., Anderson, P., Reynolds, R., Nicholls, R. E., Cullen, K., ... & Wallace, C. (2025). Hospital to community in Wales: What is the value of optometrists playing a greater role in managing neovascular AMD and glaucoma in primary care?. Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics, 45(1), 280-293
  48. Health and Social Care Northern Ireland. Northern Ireland primary care optometry enhanced service: glaucoma and ocular hypertension enhanced case finding (Level II ES) (Accessed 06/01/26)
  49. NHS Scotland (2024). The optometry enhanced services (community glaucoma service) (Scotland) Directions 2024 (Accessed 06/01/26)
  50. NHS Wales. WGOS4 Referral refinement/monitoring (Accessed 06/01/26)
  51. Ellek, N., Gunn, P. J., Bowen, M., & Harper, R. A. (2025). Mapping glaucoma higher qualifications within UK optometry. Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics
  52. The College of Optometrists (2022). Optical bodies fully support two-way IT connectivity for primary and
    secondary care (Accessed 04/12/25)
  53. The Royal College of Ophthalmologists (2025). Standardisation of electronic health records in eye care (Accessed
    04/12/25)
  54. Hooper, J., Fenerty, C. H., Roach, J., & Harper, R. A. (2024). Glaucoma treatment and deprivation: time-series analysis of general practice prescribing in England. BJGP open, 8(4)
  55. Harper, R. A., Hooper, J., Fenerty, C. H., Roach, J., & Bowen, M. (2024). Deprivation and the location of primary care optometry services in England. Eye, 38(4), 656-658
  56. Wong, T. L., Ang, J. L., Deol, S., Buckmaster, F., McTrusty, A. D., & Tatham, A. J. (2023). The relationship between multiple deprivation and severity of glaucoma at diagnosis. Eye, 37(16), 3376-3381
  57. Ng, W. S., Agarwal, P. K., Sidiki, S., McKay, L., Townend, J., & Azuara-Blanco, A. (2010). The effect of socioeconomic deprivation on severity of glaucoma at presentation. British journal of ophthalmology, 94(1), 85-87
  58. Meliante LA, Stuart KV, Luben RN, Nolan WP, Khawaja AP, Foster PJ. Current burden and future projections of glaucoma in the United Kingdom. Br J Ophthalmol. 2026 Jan 20:bjo-2025-328373. doi: 10.1136/bjo-2025-328373. Epub ahead of print. PMID: 41558831