Search for:
Home
This Month
Editorial
Hydrogen peroxide versus multipurpose disinfecting solutions, what are the differences?
more
Featured Review
1 & 2 step H2O2 CLs disinfection solutions against Acanthamoeba: How effective are they?
more
Posters
30-Day CW on Corneal Epithelial Barrier Function: RGP vs SiH Lenses
more
In The Practice
Case Studies using Silicone Hydrogel Lenses more
Tell a friend
Home
About Us
Affiliates
Contact Us
Disclaimer
Site Map

 

Quick Vote:
What proportion of your patients wearing Silicone Hydrogel lenses do you recommend hydrogen peroxide? click

 

Would you like to subscribe to our monthly newsletter?   click
 
Posters
February 2003

 

PRACTITIONER ATTITUDES TO NEW METHODS OF REFRACTIVE CORRECTION.

Marcella McParland MCOptom, CIBA Vision (UK) Ltd.

 

Purpose:

To investigate practitioner attitudes to new vision correction options: silicone hydrogel extended wear contact lenses and laser refractive surgery (LASIK or PRK).

Method:
This was a postal survey sent to 1000 optometrists randomly selected from the Opticians Register. 165 questionnaires were correctly completed and submitted for analysis.
Results:
65% of practitioners were currently fitting silicone hydrogel extended wear lenses although around half (53%) had fitted 10 or fewer patients. Most practitioners (87%) were recommending that patients sleep in the lenses; the most frequently recommended regimen was up to 29 night with occasional overnight breaks (29%). The majority of practitioners fitting the lenses (87%) were confident in recommending the modality to their patients. However, they were more reticent about claims that silicone hydrogel lenses were a safe option for extended wear, the highest proportion (36%) neither agreeing nor disagreeing that such claims were justified. 6 out of 10 respondents recommended refractive surgery to their patients (30 sometimes, 70 occasionally). A majority of these (82%) had experience of follow-up examinations on patients who had undergone the procedures. Among those who never recommended refractive surgery (39%), the most frequently cited reason (64%) was the risks were too high. Although 91% perceived patients as being satisfied with the outcome, only 36% said they were confident in recommending surgery as a viable option. They were also cautious about claims made by promoters of refractive surgery, only 14% agreeing that such claims were justified. When asked to choose between silicone hydrogel extended wear or refractive surgery as the best and safest option for their patients, 9 out of 10 respondents chose silicone hydrogels.
Conclusions:

Most practitioners are fitting the new lens materials for extended wear and feel confident in recommending them to their patients. Practitioners have more concerns regarding laser refractive surgery and do not regularly recommend such procedures. Of the two methods of refractive correction, silicone hydrogel extended wear is preferred to refractive surgery.

Additional Comments:
This work has been presented at the BCLA 2001.
Download PDF of Poster:
PRACTITIONER ATTITUDES TO NEW METHODS OF REFRACTIVE CORRECTION - 22 KB
You will need Version 4 or later of Adobe Acrobat Reader to view some documents on this site. You can get the latest version from the Adobe Home site. 

 

 
All rights reserved, copyright 2002 - 2007 siliconehydrogels.org