Contact lens & anterior eye : the journal of the British Contact Lens Association · 2018
Visual and physiological outcomes of scleral lens wear.
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Schornack Muriel, Nau Cherie, Nau Amy, Harthan Jennifer, Fogt Jennifer, Shorter Ellen
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To describe patient-specific outcomes of scleral lens wear utilizing a variety of lens designs across multiple practice settings as reported in an international practitioner survey.
METHODS: An electronic survey was administered to eye care providers who prescribe scleral lenses in which they were asked to describe their most recently examined established scleral lens patient. Data was collected on patient characteristics, lens designs, wearing schedules, care products, and visual and physiological outcomes of lens wear. Descriptive analysis of data was performed.
RESULTS: A total of 292 responses were received. Participants represented 26 countries. The most commonly reported indication for scleral lens wear was corneal irregularity (87%) followed by ocular surface disease (8%), refractive error (4%) and 1% with multiple indications. Visual acuity improved from 0.4 ± 0.4 (mean ± SD) to 0.1 ± 0.2 in eyes with corneal irregularity (p < 0.001), from 0.3 ± 0.3 to 0.1 ± 0.3 in eyes with ocular surface disease (p < 0.001), and from 0.1 ± 0.1 to 0.0± [0.1] in eye with refractive error (p = 0.01). Prior to scleral lens wear, corneal staining was present in 55% of patients; staining was present in only 35% of patients following scleral lens wear. The number of topical ophthalmic drops needed decreased from 1.7 ± 0.9 to 0.8 ± 0.8 in patients with corneal irregularity (p < 0.001) and from 3.5 ± 1.7 to 1.1 ± 1.0 in patients with ocular surface disease (p < 0.001). The number of drops used by patients with refractive error remained stable, with these patients using an average of 2.0 ± 1.0 drops prior to scleral lens wear and 1.7 ± 1.5 drops following scleral lens wear.
CONCLUSIONS: Patients with corneal irregularity experienced the greatest improvement in visual acuity, but patients with ocular surface disease and refractive error also achieved better visual acuity with scleral lenses. Ocular surface condition improved in patients with both corneal irregularity and ocular surface disease; patients with ocular surface disease experienced the most dramatic improvement. Patients who wore scleral lenses to correct uncomplicated refractive error did not experience an improvement in signs or symptoms of ocular surface disease.
METHODS: An electronic survey was administered to eye care providers who prescribe scleral lenses in which they were asked to describe their most recently examined established scleral lens patient. Data was collected on patient characteristics, lens designs, wearing schedules, care products, and visual and physiological outcomes of lens wear. Descriptive analysis of data was performed.
RESULTS: A total of 292 responses were received. Participants represented 26 countries. The most commonly reported indication for scleral lens wear was corneal irregularity (87%) followed by ocular surface disease (8%), refractive error (4%) and 1% with multiple indications. Visual acuity improved from 0.4 ± 0.4 (mean ± SD) to 0.1 ± 0.2 in eyes with corneal irregularity (p < 0.001), from 0.3 ± 0.3 to 0.1 ± 0.3 in eyes with ocular surface disease (p < 0.001), and from 0.1 ± 0.1 to 0.0± [0.1] in eye with refractive error (p = 0.01). Prior to scleral lens wear, corneal staining was present in 55% of patients; staining was present in only 35% of patients following scleral lens wear. The number of topical ophthalmic drops needed decreased from 1.7 ± 0.9 to 0.8 ± 0.8 in patients with corneal irregularity (p < 0.001) and from 3.5 ± 1.7 to 1.1 ± 1.0 in patients with ocular surface disease (p < 0.001). The number of drops used by patients with refractive error remained stable, with these patients using an average of 2.0 ± 1.0 drops prior to scleral lens wear and 1.7 ± 1.5 drops following scleral lens wear.
CONCLUSIONS: Patients with corneal irregularity experienced the greatest improvement in visual acuity, but patients with ocular surface disease and refractive error also achieved better visual acuity with scleral lenses. Ocular surface condition improved in patients with both corneal irregularity and ocular surface disease; patients with ocular surface disease experienced the most dramatic improvement. Patients who wore scleral lenses to correct uncomplicated refractive error did not experience an improvement in signs or symptoms of ocular surface disease.