Ophthalmology and therapy · 2025
Real-World Experience with Lifitegrast Ophthalmic Solution in Patients with Dry Eye Disease: A Provider Survey in the USA and Canada.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
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.
Koetting Cecelia, Schweitzer Justin, Nichols Kelly K, McDonald Marguerite, Starr Christopher E, Chan Clara C, Brujic Mile, Racine Louis, Mah Francis S, Barnett Melissa, Farid Marjan, Donnenfeld Eric D, Mercado Carolina, Ratay Michelle, Cavet Megan, Ryan Robert, Fain Joel, Feulner Lisa K
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Lifitegrast ophthalmic solution 5% is indicated to treat signs and symptoms of dry eye disease (DED). This study assessed eyecare professionals' (ECPs) real-world experiences with lifitegrast in DED.
METHODS: A total of 12 ECPs (6 ophthalmologists and 6 optometrists) with experience prescribing lifitegrast completed a cross-sectional survey on practice characteristics, lifitegrast utilization, satisfaction, and adverse events (AEs). ECPs rated satisfaction with lifitegrast overall and for specific clinical outcomes versus other prescription eye drops on a 1 (very dissatisfied) to 10 (very satisfied) Likert scale.
RESULTS: ECPs reported a mean of 1288 (range, 35-6000) patients with DED treated annually, with 20.9% receiving lifitegrast. Overall, 66.7% of ECPs reported near/complete symptom resolution in patients after 1-3 months of lifitegrast treatment. Mean (range) satisfaction ratings for onset/effectiveness were 6.8 (3-9)/6.6 (3-9). Satisfaction with reduction of DED signs was generally high: increased tear film breakup time, 5.8 (3-9); reduced conjunctival/corneal staining, 6.9 (3-9); increased Schirmer test score, 6.0 (3-9); increased tear meniscus height, 6.0 (3-9); and reduced Ocular Surface Disease Index severity, 7.0 (3-10). Symptom reduction satisfaction ratings were: itching, 5.3 (1-9); dryness, 6.9 (3-9); burning/stinging, 6.3 (1-9); redness, 6.2 (4-9); pain, 6.3 (3-9); light sensitivity, 6.5 (3-9); and blurred/poor vision, 6.8 (4-9). Overall satisfaction (ECPs/patients) was rated 7.1 (3-10)/6.8 (2-9). Predominant uses of lifitegrast included contact lens-induced DED (91.7%) and DED before/after refractive or cataract surgery (83.3% each). AEs reported were consistent with the known AE profile of lifitegrast and included burning/stinging, blurred vision, and dysgeusia.
CONCLUSIONS: This real-world survey showed that ECPs use lifitegrast to treat one fifth of their patients with DED and reported moderate-to-high personal and patient satisfaction with lifitegrast treatment.
METHODS: A total of 12 ECPs (6 ophthalmologists and 6 optometrists) with experience prescribing lifitegrast completed a cross-sectional survey on practice characteristics, lifitegrast utilization, satisfaction, and adverse events (AEs). ECPs rated satisfaction with lifitegrast overall and for specific clinical outcomes versus other prescription eye drops on a 1 (very dissatisfied) to 10 (very satisfied) Likert scale.
RESULTS: ECPs reported a mean of 1288 (range, 35-6000) patients with DED treated annually, with 20.9% receiving lifitegrast. Overall, 66.7% of ECPs reported near/complete symptom resolution in patients after 1-3 months of lifitegrast treatment. Mean (range) satisfaction ratings for onset/effectiveness were 6.8 (3-9)/6.6 (3-9). Satisfaction with reduction of DED signs was generally high: increased tear film breakup time, 5.8 (3-9); reduced conjunctival/corneal staining, 6.9 (3-9); increased Schirmer test score, 6.0 (3-9); increased tear meniscus height, 6.0 (3-9); and reduced Ocular Surface Disease Index severity, 7.0 (3-10). Symptom reduction satisfaction ratings were: itching, 5.3 (1-9); dryness, 6.9 (3-9); burning/stinging, 6.3 (1-9); redness, 6.2 (4-9); pain, 6.3 (3-9); light sensitivity, 6.5 (3-9); and blurred/poor vision, 6.8 (4-9). Overall satisfaction (ECPs/patients) was rated 7.1 (3-10)/6.8 (2-9). Predominant uses of lifitegrast included contact lens-induced DED (91.7%) and DED before/after refractive or cataract surgery (83.3% each). AEs reported were consistent with the known AE profile of lifitegrast and included burning/stinging, blurred vision, and dysgeusia.
CONCLUSIONS: This real-world survey showed that ECPs use lifitegrast to treat one fifth of their patients with DED and reported moderate-to-high personal and patient satisfaction with lifitegrast treatment.