Patient-Reported Dry Eye Treatment and Burden of Care

OBJECTIVES

Dry eye is a common condition that can decrease the quality of life. This survey-based study of persons with dry eye investigated self-reported treatments (initial, current), out-of-pocket expenses, time spent on self-management, sources of care, and sources of information about their condition.

METHODS

Online dry eye newsletters and support groups were emailed a link to an electronic survey asking members to participate. Survey respondents were not required to answer every question.

RESULTS

In total, 639 persons with self-reported dry eye responded (86% women, 14% men [n=623]; mean ± SD age, 55 ± 14 years [n=595]). Artificial tears were the most reported intervention (76% initially, 71% currently). The median (interquartile range) out-of-pocket treatment cost annually was $500 ($200-$1,320 [n=506]). In addition, 55% (n=544) estimated 5 to 20 min daily on self-management; 22% spent an hour or more. Ophthalmologists provided most dry eye care (67%, n=520). Only 48% (n=524) reported that their primary source of dry eye information came from their eye care clinician.

CONCLUSIONS

Artificial tears are the primary treatment for dry eye. Ophthalmologists provide most dry eye care, but half of patients report that their eye care provider is not their primary source of information. Almost one fourth of patients spend an hour or more daily on treatments.

Trends in Scleral Lens Fitting Practices: 2020 Scleral Lenses in Current Ophthalmic Practice Evaluation Survey

OBJECTIVES

To explore trends in demographic characteristics of scleral lens (SL) practitioners and primary indications for SL fitting over 5 years.

METHODS

An online survey similar to the 2015 Scleral Lenses in Current Ophthalmic Practice Evaluation (SCOPE) study was designed and administered from November 8, 2019, through March 31, 2020, to attendees at two international contact lens meetings, members of the Scleral Lens Education Society, and participants in the 2015 SCOPE study. Practitioners reporting at least five completed SL fits were included in the analysis.

RESULTS

Of 922 respondents, 777 had fit at least five SLs: 63% from the United States (59 other countries were represented), findings similar to the 2015 survey, in which 799 respondents (72%) were US-based and 49 from other countries. Most practitioners were in community practice (76%) than academic practice (24%). In 2015, 64% were in community practice and 36% in academic practice. A median of 84% of SLs were fit for corneal irregularity, 10% for ocular surface disease, and 2% for uncomplicated refractive error. In comparison, the 2015 indications were 74%, 16%, and 10%, respectively. The median number of fits completed per practitioner was 100 (range, 5-10,000; mean [SD] 284 [717]; n=752). In 2015, the median was 36 (range, 5-3,600; mean [SD] 125 [299]; n=678).

CONCLUSIONS

The number of experienced SL practitioners is increasing, as is international representation. Most practitioners practice in community rather than academic settings. SLs continue to be primarily prescribed for corneal irregularity and are rarely used solely for correction of refractive error.

Diagnostic accuracy of clinical signs, symptoms and point-of-care testing for early adenoviral conjunctivitis

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

This study identifies key signs and symptoms of acute conjunctivitis, that when combined with a point-of-care test, can improve clinician accuracy of diagnosing adenoviral conjunctivitis.

BACKGROUND

Adenoviral conjunctivitis is a common ocular infection with the potential for high economic impact due to widespread outbreaks and subsequent furloughs from work and school. In this report, we describe clinical signs and participant-reported symptoms that most accurately identify polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-confirmed adenoviral conjunctivitis.

METHODS

Adults with 'red eye' symptoms of four days or less were enrolled. Participants rated 10 ocular symptoms from 0 (not bothersome) to 10 (very bothersome), and indicated the presence or absence of systemic flu-like symptoms. Clinicians determined the presence or absence of swollen lymph nodes and rated the severity of eight ocular signs using a 5-point scale. An immunoassay targeting adenovirus antigen was utilised for the point-of-care test, and conjunctival swab samples were obtained for subsequent adenovirus detection by PCR analyses. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression models were used to identify symptoms and signs associated with PCR-confirmed adenoviral conjunctivitis. The diagnostic accuracy of these clinical findings, and the potential benefit of incorporating point-of-care test results, was assessed by calculating areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC).

RESULTS

Clinician-rated bulbar conjunctival redness, participant-rated eyelid swelling and overall ocular discomfort had the best predictive value in the multivariate logistic regression model with an AUC of 0.83. The addition of the point-of-care test results to these three clinical sign/symptom scores improved diagnostic accuracy, increasing the AUC to 0.94.

CONCLUSIONS

Conjunctival redness severity and participant-reported eyelid swelling and overall discomfort, along with adenoviral point-of-care test results, were highly predictive in identifying individuals with PCR-confirmed adenoviral conjunctivitis. Improved diagnostic accuracy by clinicians at the initial presenting visit could prevent unnecessary work furloughs and facilitate earlier treatment decisions.

Success of Masking 5% Povidone-Iodine Treatment: The Reducing Adenoviral Patient Infected Days Study

SIGNIFICANCE

The effectiveness of masking is rarely evaluated or reported in single- or double-masked clinical trials. Knowledge of treatment assignment by participants and clinicians can bias the assessment of treatment efficacy.

PURPOSE

This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of masking in a double-masked trial of 5% povidone-iodine for the treatment of adenoviral conjunctivitis.

METHODS

The Reducing Adenoviral Patient Infected Days study is a double-masked, randomized trial comparing a one-time, in-office administration of 5% povidone-iodine with artificial tears for the treatment of adenoviral conjunctivitis. Masking was assessed by asking participants and masked clinicians at designated time points if they believed the treatment administered was povidone-iodine or artificial tears, or if they were unsure. Adequacy of masking was quantified using a modified Bang Blinding Index.

RESULTS

Immediately after treatment, 34% of participants who received povidone-iodine and 69% of those who received artificial tears guessed incorrectly or were unsure of their treatment (modified Bang Indices of 0.31 and -0.38, respectively). On day 4, 38% of the povidone-iodine participants and 52% of the artificial tear participants guessed incorrectly or were unsure of their treatment (modified Bang Indices of 0.24 and -0.05, respectively), indicating adequate and ideal masking. On days 1, 4, 7, 14, and 21, masked clinicians guessed incorrectly or were unsure of treatment in 53%, 50%, 40%, 39%, and 42% among povidone-iodine participants compared with 44%, 35%, 38%, 35%, and 39% among artificial tears participants, respectively. The modified Bang Indices for clinician masking in the povidone-iodine group ranged from -0.05 to 0.25 and from 0.13 to 0.29 in the artificial tears group.

CONCLUSIONS

Masking of participants and clinicians was adequate. Successful masking increases confidence that subjective measurements are not biased. We recommend quantitative assessment and reporting the effectiveness of masking in ophthalmic clinical trials.

Multicenter review of impression-based scleral devices

OBJECTIVE

To describe outcomes using impression based-scleral devices for the management of anterior segment disease.

METHODS

Retrospective chart review identified all patients who were fitted with impression-based scleral devices between January 1, 2013 and June 30, 2019 at three specialty contact lens practices. Patient demographic data, indication for device use, visual and physiological outcomes, as well as details of the fitting process and survival of device use were determined.

RESULTS

Forty-four patients (70 eyes) were included in the study. Primary indications for device use included corneal irregularity (28 patients, 44 eyes) and ocular surface disease (16 patients, 26 eyes). Fifty-four percent of patients had more than one ocular surface condition, and 39 % of patients had undergone at least one anterior segment surgical procedure. Twenty-nine patients had unsuccessfully attempted to wear standard scleral lenses prior to being fit with impression-based devices. Visual acuity improved significantly with impression-based devices compared to habitual correction (p < 0.001). Completion of the fitting process (including visit to acquire the impression and post-fitting assessments) required an average of 4 [1.5] visits.Ideal haptic alignment was achieved with 74 % and complete limbal clearance was achieved in 83 % of fits. Device use was discontinued due to complications in two eyes.

CONCLUSION

Patients with complex eye disease who are unable to successfully wear standard scleral lenses successfully may achieve visual and therapeutic success with impression-based devices.

Current U.S. based optometric scleral lens curricula and fitting recommendations: SCOPE educators survey

OBJECTIVES

To describe current components of scleral lens curricula at U.S. based optometry colleges and universities.

METHODS

Contact lens educators were surveyed between June 2019 and August 2019 regarding their optometric scleral lens curriculum. Respondents were asked to describe their experience and involvement in optometric scleral lens education as well as to describe components of scleral lens curricula. Educators were also asked to identify sources of information upon which they rely on in order to stay informed about new developments and best practices in scleral lens prescription and management.

RESULTS

Most programs begin scleral lens education during the 3rd year of optometric education (71.2 %; n = 52). Students complete an estimated 18.0 ± 18.1 (range 2-100) scleral lens evaluations during training (n = 36). Ideal fitting characteristics taught include central corneal clearance of 206.3 ± 44 microns (range 150-350, n = 40), limbal clearance of 62.1 ± 23.6 microns (range 20-100, n = 36) with one clock hour or less of conjunctival vascular compression (n = 41). Educators ranked in-person continuing education (61 %, 22/36) followed by contact lens laboratory consults (22 %, 8/36) as the two most important sources of information on best practices in scleral lens prescription and management.

CONCLUSIONS

Educators are uniquely positioned to guide the next generation of eyecare providers by incorporating and disseminating new research findings into their scleral lens curricula.