Clinical & experimental ophthalmology · 2004
Evaluation of surveillance methods for an epidemiological study of contact lens related microbial keratitis.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Keay Lisa, Edwards Katie, Brian Garry, Naduvilath Thomas, Stapleton Fiona
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To evaluate surveillance methods in a pilot epidemiological study of contact lens related microbial keratitis (MK) cases identified by ophthalmic practitioners in Australia and New Zealand between May and August 2003 inclusive.
METHODS: Twelve ophthalmologists and 55 optometrists from rural and metropolitan locations were sent a study information pack with postal reporting forms. After 2 months, practitioners were emailed a link to a website for Internet reporting. After 4 months, practitioners were prompted by email and then by telephone if a response was not received. Passive response rates were the rate of returns after posting information and emailing the website link. Active response rates included personalized email and telephone follow-up.
RESULTS: Ten cases of MK were identified by optometrists and five by ophthalmologists. The passive response rates were 79% and 58% for the first and second reporting periods, respectively. There was a lower response rate in the second reporting period compared to the first (P = 0.02). With active surveillance the response rate increased to 97% and 96%. A large proportion of optometrists (62%) and ophthalmologists (55%) used the website for at least one reporting period. Internet reporting was used by all New Zealand practitioners (5/5).
CONCLUSIONS: A surveillance study to estimate the incidence of contact lens related MK in Australia and New Zealand is feasible and acceptable. Internet-based reporting offers a reliable, rapid and cost-effective means of running a large scale, international surveillance study. Active surveillance methods are necessary to enhance reporting rates.
METHODS: Twelve ophthalmologists and 55 optometrists from rural and metropolitan locations were sent a study information pack with postal reporting forms. After 2 months, practitioners were emailed a link to a website for Internet reporting. After 4 months, practitioners were prompted by email and then by telephone if a response was not received. Passive response rates were the rate of returns after posting information and emailing the website link. Active response rates included personalized email and telephone follow-up.
RESULTS: Ten cases of MK were identified by optometrists and five by ophthalmologists. The passive response rates were 79% and 58% for the first and second reporting periods, respectively. There was a lower response rate in the second reporting period compared to the first (P = 0.02). With active surveillance the response rate increased to 97% and 96%. A large proportion of optometrists (62%) and ophthalmologists (55%) used the website for at least one reporting period. Internet reporting was used by all New Zealand practitioners (5/5).
CONCLUSIONS: A surveillance study to estimate the incidence of contact lens related MK in Australia and New Zealand is feasible and acceptable. Internet-based reporting offers a reliable, rapid and cost-effective means of running a large scale, international surveillance study. Active surveillance methods are necessary to enhance reporting rates.