Search

Purpose: In Canada, teaching in paediatric eye care has increased in the past decade both within the optometry curriculum and as continuing education to optometrists. Paediatric vision care guidelines have also been established by North American optometric associations. This study examined whether this exposure was associated with changes in paediatric eye care in Canada over a 14‐year period. Methods: Canadian optometrists were invited to participate in an anonymous 35‐item survey in 2007 and 2021. The surveys sought to investigate optometrist's recommendations for first eye examinations, the number of paediatric patients seen in a typical week and preparedness to provide eye examinations to children. Response frequencies were determined for each survey item. Results: Across Canada, 133/1000 (13.3%) and 261/~6419 (~4.1%) optometrists responded to the survey in 2007 and 2021, respectively. No significant difference was found in the number of years practicing, days per week in practice and total number of patients seen per week. The modal age optometrists recommended children be seen for their first eye examination changed from 3–4 years in 2007 (53%) to 6–12 months in 2021 (61%). In 2007, 87% of respondents provided eye examinations to children <2 years, increasing to 94% in 2021 (p = 0.02). Despite a reduction in the recommended age between the two survey years, the most frequent age children were seen for their first eye examination was 3‐4 years (30% in both surveys) and the most common age seen in a typical week remained unchanged (4–6 years—56% 2007; 66% 2021). Conclusion: Although optometrists' willingness to provide paediatric eye care increased over the past 14 years, the number of children seen in a typical week did not change. Barriers to determine why more children are not being seen at an earlier age need to be investigated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Evidence‐based practice is fundamental to providing quality care, patient satisfaction and judicious use of limited healthcare resources. However, variability in evidence‐based eye care delivery has been reported. Given the important role of optometrists in delivering primary eye care, a better understanding of the barriers and facilitators to providing optometric care is required. This systematic review aimed to identify determinants (barriers and facilitators) of eye care delivery by optometrists and interventions that may improve eye care delivery. Recent findings: PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, SCOPUS, PsychINFO, ProQuest and Web of Science were searched for studies reporting barriers and facilitators to eye care delivery published between 1999 and 2020. The Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) was used to analyse data (quotations, interpretive summaries, survey result) with barriers and facilitators coded to one or more of the 14 domains, and used to identify the key behavioural domains influencing eye care delivery based on frequency of coding, elaboration and stated importance in the study. Influential domains were mapped to the Behaviour Change Wheel to identify potential interventions to improve eye care delivery. Of the 802 studies retrieved from the search, 30 were included. Frequently identified barriers were time constraints, resources and equipment issues, patient factors, lack of awareness, skill proficiency deficits and negative attitudes and beliefs. Frequently identified facilitators were adequate time, resources and equipment, education, skill proficiency and understanding the relevancy of the eye care provided. The key TDF domains influencing eye care delivery were 'environmental context and resources' (time, resources, equipment issues, patient factors), 'knowledge' (awareness issues), 'skills' (skills proficiency) and 'belief about consequences' (beliefs and relevancy). Intervention functions that may improve eye care delivery were education, training, restriction, environmental restructuring, enablement, persuasion and modelling. Summary: The barriers and facilitators identified in this review were diverse and located at both the practitioner and organisational levels. Four TDF domains were found to be influential determinants of eye care practice. Intervention functions identified in this study can be used to improve the appropriateness of primary eye care delivery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Purpose: Cataract shared care schemes involving community optometrists show wide variation in practice. We report on defined key performance indicators (KPIs) which improve accountability between stakeholders. Methods: In this prospective study over nine months at a UK public hospital, we evaluated the outcomes of consecutive direct cataract referrals from community optometrists against two KPIs agreed under a service‐level agreement between the Hospital Eye Service and community optometrists: (1) 85% of patients listed for cataract listing at first consultation; and (2) 90% postoperative feedback return rate on patients discharged to community optometrists. A detailed analysis on referral triage, surgical listing and postoperative form return rate is reported in this study. Results: A total of 733 direct cataract referrals were received using a designated referral form of which 86% were listed for cataract surgery. The predominant reason for not listing was a failure to reach the visual threshold set by the local clinical commissioning guidelines. Out of 569 cataract surgical episodes, 402 (71%) patients were discharged on the same day of surgery to community optometrist follow up. Completed postoperative feedback was returned from 374 patients (93%). Conclusion: Direct cataract referrals from accredited community optometrists led to a majority of patients receiving a definitive clinical decision during first consultation. Postoperative community follow up reduced hospital visits and allowed for convenient consultation closer to home following uncomplicated cataract surgery. A service‐level agreement with an accreditation scheme measured against KPIs enhances the accountability of stakeholders involved in the cataract shared care scheme. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose Tobacco smoking and nutrition are key lifestyle factors with long-term effects on eye health. However, little is known about patients' perceptions and experiences in these areas in relation to the care received from optometrists. The main aim was to survey patients' perceptions and prior experience regarding the role of optometrists in enquiring and providing advice about tobacco smoking and nutrition. Methods An anonymous, paper-based survey was distributed to a convenience sample of 225 adults attending the University of Melbourne eye care clinic. Respondents provided demographic and other information (age, sex, length of time since last eye examination, country of most recent eye examination, smoking status and intake of nutritional supplements) and indicated their level of agreement (using a five-step Likert scale) with a series of statements relating to the care provided by optometrists in the areas of health, smoking and nutrition. The statements were designed to assess the perceived scope of practice of optometrists and the extent to which patients expect, and feel comfortable, discussing these issues with their optometrist. Results 220 completed surveys were returned. Most respondents (>80%) agreed that they visit their optometrist to quantify their refractive error and to examine their eye health. About two-thirds of respondents indicated that they expect their optometrist to ask about their general health, with almost half expecting their optometrist to communicate with their general medical practitioner. Approximately one-third of respondents indicated having been routinely questioned about their smoking status, diet and nutritional supplement intake by their optometrist. This was despite about half expecting their optometrist to question them about these factors and almost three out of four respondents indicating that they felt comfortable talking with their optometrist about these lifestyle behaviours. Conclusions This study provides novel insight into patients' perceptions and experience with optometric practice in the areas of tobacco smoking and nutrition. The majority of respondents expected their optometrist to examine their eye health, ask them about their smoking and diet habits, and indicated feeling comfortable discussing these topics with their primary eye care provider. These findings suggest that brief advice interventions relating to tobacco use and diet are likely to be acceptable to deliver in optometry practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose Diseases involving the macula and posterior pole are leading causes of visual impairment and blindness worldwide and may require prompt ophthalmological care. However, access to eye-care and timely patient management may be limited due to inefficient and inappropriate referrals between primary eye-care providers and ophthalmology. Optometrists with a special interest in macular disease may be useful as a community aid to better stratify and recommend best-practice management plans for suitable patients. This study assesses such a notion by appraising the optometric referral patterns of patients with suspected macular disease to an intermediate-tier optometric imaging clinic. Methods We performed a retrospective review of patient records and referrals using patients examined at Centre for Eye Health ( CFEH) for an initial or follow up macular assessment between the 1/7/2013 and 30/6/2014 ( n = 291). The following data were analysed: patient demographic characteristics, primary reason for referral, diagnosed/suspected condition, CFEH diagnosis and recommended management plan. Results The number of referrals stipulating a diagnosis, confirmed after evaluation at CFEH was 121 of 291 (42%). After evaluation at CFEH, the number of cases without a specific diagnosis was approximately halved (reduced from 47% to 23%), while the number of cases with no apparent defect or normal aging changes rose from 1% to 15%. Overall diagnostic congruency for specified macular conditions was high (58-94%); cases were seldom (30/291, 10%) found to have a completely different macular condition. 244 of 291 (84%) patients seen at CFEH were recommended ongoing optometric care: either with the referring optometrist or through recall to CFEH. Referral to an ophthalmologist was recommended in 47 instances (16%). Conclusions More widespread adoption of intermediate-tier optometric eye-care referral pathways in macular disease (following opportunistic primary care screening) has the potential to reduce the number of cases with non-specific diagnoses and to increase those with a diagnosis of normal aging changes or no apparent disease. The majority of cases seen under this intermediate-tier model required ongoing optometric care only and did not require face-to-face consultation with an ophthalmologist. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose UK demographic and legislative changes combined with increasing burdens on National Health Service manpower and budgets have led to extended roles for community optometrists providing locally-commissioned enhanced optometric services ( EOS). This realist review's objectives were to develop programme theories that implicitly or explicitly explain quality outcomes for eye care provided by optometrists via EOS and to test these theories by investigating the effectiveness of services for cataract, glaucoma, and primary eye care. Methods The review protocol was published on PROSPERO, and RAMESES publication standards were followed. Programme theories were formulated via scoping literature searches and expert consultation. The searching process involved all relevant electronic databases and grey literature, without restrictions on study design. Data synthesis focussed on questioning the integrity of each theory by considering supportive and refuting evidence from the source literature. Results Good evidence exists for cataract, glaucoma and primary eye care EOS that: with appropriate training, accredited optometrists manage patients commensurate with usual care standards; genuine partnerships can exist between community and hospital providers for cataract and glaucoma EOS; patient satisfaction with all three types of service is high; cost-effectiveness of services is unproven for cataract and primary eye care, while glaucoma EOS cost-effectiveness depends on service type; contextual factors may influence service success. Conclusions The EOS reviewed are clinically effective and provide patient satisfaction but limited data is available on cost-effectiveness. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose The aim of this study was to compare the self-reported clinical practice behaviours of optometrists in Australia and the United Kingdom ( UK) with respect to the diagnosis and management of dry eye disease ( DED). We also sought to examine whether the reported practices of clinicians in each region were consistent with current evidence-based recommendations for DED. Methods An online survey was distributed to optometrists (Australia, n = 654; UK, n = 1006). Respondents provided information about practice modality, years of optometric experience, preferred diagnostic and management strategies (stratified by DED severity) and the information/evidence base used to guide patient care. Results A total of 317 completed surveys were received (response rates, Australia: 21%, UK: 17%). Optometrists in both regions demonstrated similarly strong knowledge of tear film assessment and adopted both subjective and objective techniques to diagnose DED. Patient symptoms were considered the most important, valuable and commonly performed assessment by both Australian and UK respondents. UK practitioners valued and utilised conjunctival signs and tear meniscus height assessments more than Australian optometrists ( p < 0.05), who placed relatively greater emphasis on sodium fluorescein tear break-up time to diagnose DED ( p < 0.05). Clinicians in both locations tailored DED therapy to severity. While practitioners in both regions predominantly managed mild DED with eyelid hygiene and tear supplementation, Australian optometrists indicated prescribing topical corticosteroid therapy significantly more often than UK practitioners for moderate (14% vs 6%) and severe (52% vs 8%) disease ( p < 0.05). The major source of information used to guide practitioners' dry eye management practices was continuing education conferences. Conclusions This study highlights a range of parallels and divergences in dry eye clinical practice between Australian and UK optometrists. Our data identify both areas of strength in the adoption of evidence-based practice, as well as some potential to improve international translation of dry eye research evidence into practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose Guidelines for the screening, prognosis, diagnosis, management and prevention of glaucoma were released by the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council in 2010. Comparable guidance has been made available by respective bodies in the USA and UK at a similar time. Key to successful translation of guidelines into clinical practice includes clinicians having the necessary skills to perform required tests. Optometrists in Australia and New Zealand were invited to participate in an online survey exploring these aspects. The results provide insights for improving glaucoma diagnosis and management by optometric primary eye care practitioners. Methods An online questionnaire was developed to investigate glaucoma assessment of optometrists as a function of demographic details, educational background and experience. Key points to ascertain compliance with current guidelines were the availability of equipment, procedural confidence in techniques, and preferences in visual field tests. Chi square statistics was employed to support similarity to national averages and highlight differences between the two countries. Multivariate linear regression analysis identified variables significantly associated with individual tests being available to optometrists and their confidence in applying them. Results Thirteen per cent of all Australian and 36% of the New Zealand optometrists responded to the survey in 2013, which reflected the demographics/geography of the practising populations. Techniques considered essential or preferred for glaucoma assessment were widely available in both countries with the exception of gonioscopy and pachymetry. After correcting for availability, regression models highlighted therapeutic endorsement and knowledge of glaucoma guidelines as the main variables to maintain high diagnostic confidence. Correlations to number of years in optometric practice mirrored a changed emphasis in teaching and technology over the past 10-15 years. Conclusions Australian and New Zealand optometrists were well equipped to perform glaucoma assessments with the possible exception of gonioscopy. Advanced imaging modalities were not yet fully integrated into optometric practice, although optical coherence tomography has shown use by 23-32% of optometrists. A marked increase in use, availability and procedural confidence of gonioscopy and other techniques with therapeutically endorsed optometrists demonstrates the advantage and importance of additional training. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To investigate the content of referrals to a hospital eye department and describe differences between referring clinician (optometrist or GP) and referral formats. Methods: A random sample of 433 new referrals to Bradford Royal Infirmary hospital eye service (HES) during 2007 and 2008 were retrospectively analysed. Results: Three hundred and eleven referrals (72%) were from optometric practice and 122 (28%) from general practice. Optometric referrals were mainly for cataract and posterior capsular opacification (27%), glaucoma or suspect glaucoma (20%) and diabetic retinopathy (10%). Conclusions: The proportion of referrals to the hospital eye service from optometrists appears to be increasing (1988: 39%, 1999: 48%, present study 72%). GPs mainly refer patients with anterior segment disorders, particularly lid lesions, based on direct observation and symptoms. Optometrists refer patients with a wide range of ocular diseases and include fundus observations and visual acuity measurements in their referrals. There is a need to inform optometrists of what content is required in a referral to the HES from GOS sight tests, at least for the common referral conditions such as age-related cataract and suspect open-angle glaucoma. Referral forms specifically designed for these commonly referred conditions are likely to improve referral quality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: A recent review found standardised patient (SP) methodology to be the gold standard method for evaluating clinical care. We compared the clinical records describing the content of optometric eye examinations with the actual content, as revealed by SPs. Methods: We recruited 111 community optometrists in the South East of the UK who consented to be visited by unannounced actors for an eye examination. The actors received extensive training to enable accurate reporting of the content of the eye examinations, via an audio recording and a checklist completed for each clinical encounter. Each participating optometrist was visited by three standardised patients. Upon completion of the standardised patient visits, copies of the clinical records were requested. Using the SP findings as the gold standard, the information gathered from the clinical record was classified for each quality criterion as true positive (reported by SP and documented on the record card), false negative (reported by SP but not documented on the record card), false positive (not reported by SP but recorded on the record card) and true negative (not reported by SP and not recorded on the record card). Results: Compared to the gold standard, false positives were identified during record abstraction in 4% of cases and false negatives in 18% of cases. For symptoms and history, the proportion of false negatives ranged from 15% to 25% and 3 to 4% for false positives. The proportion of false negatives for tests performed during the eye examinations ranged from 12% to 22% and false positives ranged from 2% to 6%. Optometrists give patients more verbal advice than is indicated in their records (false negatives, 11–19%). Five to 15% of practitioners recorded patient management and advice that was not reported by the SPs. Conclusions: Our findings regarding optometric consultation mirror the findings in other healthcare disciplines: clinical records are an imperfect representation of the content of a clinical consultation. Clinical records are subject to a recording bias leading to both under- and over-estimation of the care provided due to the presence of false negatives and false positives. This study has important implications for clinico-legal cases, where clinical records are a key item of evidence; and our findings indicate that accurate record-keeping should be a priority for optometric continuing education. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Standardised patients (SPs) are the gold standard methodology for evaluating clinical care. This approach was used to investigate the content of optometric eyecare for a presbyopic patient who presented with recent photopsia. Methods: A total of 102 community optometrists consented to be visited by an actor for a recorded eye examination. This actor received extensive training to enable accurate reporting of the content of the eye examinations, via an audio recording and a checklist completed for each clinical encounter. The actor presented unannounced (incognito) as a 59-year-old patient seeking a private eye examination and complaining of recent onset flashing lights. The results of each clinical encounter were recorded on a pre-designed checklist based on evidence-based reviews on photopsia, clinical guidelines and the views of an expert panel. Results: The presence of the symptom of photopsia was proactively detected in 87% of cases. Although none of the optometrists visited asked all seven gold standard questions relating to the presenting symptoms of flashing lights, 35% asked four of the seven questions. A total of 85% of optometrists asked the patient if he noticed any floaters in his vision and 36% of optometrists asked if he had noticed any shadows in his vision. The proportion of the tests recommended by the expert panel that were carried out varied from 33 to 100% with a mean of 67%. Specifically, 66% recommended dilated fundoscopy to be carried out either by themselves or by another eyecare practitioner, and 29% of optometrists asked the patient to seek a second opinion regarding the photopsia. Of those who referred, 70% asked for the referral to be on the same day or within a week. Conclusion: SP encounters are an effective way of measuring clinical care within optometry and should be considered for further comparative measurements of quality of care. As in research using SPs in other healthcare disciplines, our study has highlighted substantial differences between different practitioners in the duration and depth of their clinical investigations. This highlights the fact that not all eye examinations are the same but inherently different and that there is no such thing as a ‘standard sight test’. Future optometric continuing education could focus on history taking, examination techniques and referral guidelines for patients presenting with symptoms of posterior vitreous detachment, retinal breaks and secondary retinal detachment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Recent changes in medicines legislation in the UK have broadened the opportunities for optometrists to use and supply therapeutic drugs. We set out to investigate the current therapeutic practice of UK optometrists and to elicit their views on an extended prescribing role. Methods: Members of the College of Optometrists were invited via email to take part in an online survey. The survey questions covered four areas: mode of practice, proximity and relationship to other providers of eye care, scope of current therapeutic practice and future plans regarding prescriber training. Results: Of the 1288 responses received (response rate 24%), over 90% were from optometrists working in community practice. Common, non-sight-threatening conditions were managed frequently or occasionally by between 69 and 96% of respondents. Blepharitis and dry eye were the most common (managed routinely by >70%). In terms of therapeutic agents used, large numbers of optometrists reported that they commonly supplied or recommended over-the-counter (non-prescription) drugs, particularly lubricants and anti-allergic agents. However, fewer respondents supplied antibiotics (only 14% supplying chloramphenicol or fusidic acid frequently). Overall, relatively few respondents (14%) expressed no interest in undertaking further training for extended prescribing, although several barriers were identified, including cost and time taken for training, lack of remuneration and fear of litigation. Conclusion: Significant numbers of community optometrists are currently managing a range of common ocular conditions using a limited formulary. Enabling optometrists to train as independent prescribers will further develop this role, allowing greater use of their skills and providing patients with quicker access to medicines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To assess the information included in optometrist referrals for cataract to the Hospital Eye Service with reference to the recommendations made by the Department of Health in ‘Action on Cataracts’ and the resultant surgical listing rates. Methods: We prospectively collected and analysed the information included in three different types of optometrist referrals for cataract over 8 weeks. Referrals containing ‘full information’ as recommended in ‘Action on Cataracts’ confirmed cataract as the cause of visual loss with a detrimental effect on the patient's lifestyle, and a willingness for surgery. The referral outcomes were assessed in terms of listing rate and the reasons for not listing, for each type of referral form. Results: A total of 412 referrals were analysed. Of these, 50% (208) were ‘conventional’ referrals via the general practitioner (GP) [39% ( n = 162) using the General Ophthalmic Services (GOS) 18 referral form and 11% ( n = 46) an optometrist's custom letter]; 35% ( n = 143) were direct referrals and 15% ( n = 61) were GP referrals with no optometrist information (these results were excluded from further analysis). The listing rates for optometric referrals were 78% ( n = 272) overall, 83% ( n = 119) for direct and 74% ( n = 153) for conventional referrals. ‘Full information’ was included in 17% ( n = 8) of letter referrals and 10% ( n = 16) of GOS 18 referrals. The listing rates were 83% for referrals with full information and 73% for referrals specifying only that cataracts were the cause of visual loss. The listing rates for referrals with partial information were 78% for ‘cataract’ plus ‘effect on lifestyle’ and 67% for ‘cataract’ plus ‘willingness for surgery’. The most common reason for not listing a patient for surgery was ‘no effect on lifestyle’, accounting for 42% ( n = 32). Conclusion: We recommend that all referrals for cataract should confirm a detrimental effect on lifestyle and the patient’s willingness for surgery, in addition to confirming cataract as the main cause of visual loss. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An alternative to the use of printed grading scales for assessing the severity of contact lens-induced ocular pathology is to use computer-generated grading morphs. This technique involves manipulation of a continuously variable movie sequence until this matches the severity of the condition being observed. To validate the use of computer morphs, nine experienced optometrists were each invited to grade - to the nearest 0.1 increment - an image of each of 16 contact lens complications, using printed scales (Efron Grading Scales for Contact Lens Complications) and computer morphs (Efron Grading Morphs). This entire procedure was repeated approximately 2 weeks later, yielding a total data base comprising of 576 individual grading estimates. Good accuracy was achieved using computer morphs, as evidenced by the similarity between the mean of the test and retest grading estimates for the printed scales (2.8 ± 0.7) and the computer morphs (2.6 ± 0.8) (F[SUB1.8] - 2.7, p - 0.14). There was no difference in median reliability between the printed scales (±0.41) and the computer morphs (±0.43) (Z - 0.1, p - 0.95). Computer rnorphs are thus considered to have been validated in view of their accuracy and reliability compared with printed scales. In addition, computer morphs offer considerable utility in terms of computer-based clinical record keeping, teaching and learning. and clinical research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Young subjects (mean age 25.2 ± 2.3 years) viewed with symmetric convergence two fusible targets situated at different distances (i.e. anisoaccommodative targets). The fused target was a Maltese cross which subtended 3 at the eye: the right and left arms of the cross were seen by both eyes and each of the other arms was seen by only one eye. The vergences of the anisoaccommodative targets differed by either 3.00 or 0.50 D. Accommodation of each eye was measured by a Canon R1 auto-refractor. There was no evidence of systematic anisoaccommodation. When presented with anisoaccommodative targets, the accommodation of both eyes tended towards a level which was more appropriate to the farther target, i.e. that which required less accommodative effort. Implications of the findings for optometry are briefly discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The purpose of this study was the evaluation of community based optometric monitoring of stable glaucoma patients and glaucoma suspects compared to the routine Hospital Eye Services (HES) nnonitoring. Four hundred and five subjects were recruited from routine outpatient clinics at the Bristol Eye Hospital. All eligible participants were seen in the routine hospital clinic and then within two months were given a 'Gold Standard Assessment' (GSA) by an independent research team. Participants then visited one of 12 glaucoma-trained optometrists, for a standard battery of tests. Randomisation resulted in 204 subjects being allocated to community care, with reviews on a six monthly basis, with 201 who remained a control group within the hospital. Referral criteria were established to enable optometric detection of apparent glaucomatous progression. A questionnaire was used to assess patient satisfaction with both care types. Additionally a cost analysis exercise was performed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Visual conversion reaction (VCR) is a psychosomatic illness that will occasionally be seen by optometrists and ophthalmologists. This paper discusses some of the possible aetiologies and manifestations of the condition. Investigation and management of children with suspected VCR is discussed. Four case histories are presented in which signs of VCR included amblyopia, reduced accommodation and a deterioration in handwriting. The visual field defects presented include a static quantitative anomaly. Such a defect has not previously been reported. 'Just as you ought not to attempt to cure eyes without head or head without body, so you should not treat body without soul'(Socrates) [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The International Optometric and Optical League (IOOL) sent out a questionnaire to contacts in countries across the world in order to formulate an "Optometry Profile" on as many countries as possible. The information from the 58 replies is summarized. The very varied distribution of optometric services that is revealed is discussed in the light of experience gained by the author in his own visits and correspondence relating to the worldwide situation of optometry. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The author reflects on the use of cosmetics on eyes. It states that the use of kohl, a main ingredient of make up, started in Ancient Egypt. It says that Kohl in the present day that is used in makeup are less toxic. It mentions the need for female patients to consult with female optometrist to identify make up that could affect eye examination.

Contact lens (CL) complications account for 2.2-10.0% of patients attending ophthalmic Accident and Emergency (A&E) units. A survey was conducted to evaluate disease severity among CL wearers attending the Oxford Eye Hospital A&E Unit. CL wearers without a medical indication for CL wear completed a short questionnaire eliciting CL type and wear schedule. Subsequently, A&E Senior House Officers indicated the diagnosis and whether, in their opinion, the patient could have been managed by their optometrist or contact lens practitioner. Approximately halt ot the CL wearers (321/653, 49%) presented with CL related disorders, but only 16% (53/321) of these had potentially sight-threatening disease. More than a third of these patients were deemed to be inappropriately attending (125/321, 39%). presenting with minor problems such as corneal abrasions, CL handling difficulties and CL solution 'accidents'. Better patient instruction, together with encouragement to consult their optometrist or contact lens practitioner first if problems occur, would greatly reduce the burden of A&E attendance by CL wearers with minor complaints. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In a preliminary experiment in 12 healthy young volunteers, one drop of thymoxamine 0.5% instilled into the conjunctival sac completely reversed the mydriasis produced by phenylephrine 2.5%, 5% and 10% after 20 minutes. In a second study in eight volunteers, thymoxamine 0.5% completely prevented the mydriasis produced by phenylephrine 2.5 % and produced a miosis. It also completely reversed the mydriasis produced by tropicamide 0.5%. The mydriatic effect of tropicamide 0.5% plus phenylephrine 2.5%, however, was not completely reversed by thymoxamine 0.5 % over a period of 180 minutes. Phenylephrine, tropicamide and thymoxamine are freely available for use by registered optometrists. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A recent English government-funded study has suggested that optometrists are not best suited to screening for diabetic retinopathy. This is surprising given the level of training of optometrists and their aptitude in detecting other conditions such as glaucoma and cataract. The need to screen for diabetic retinopathy is discussed. The major unresolved issue concerns the choice of screening modality, i.e. who should perform screening, when and how. A literature search is reported. Given the available evidence, to make conclusions about the relative performance of optometrists with other screeners would be inappropriate. Unresolved controversies could be addressed by new prospective studies of optometrists, and others, in screening. A pragmatic design, mirroring the current environment of care, may be important. In particular, the manner in which diabetics currently present to the health service would make screening by one modality of limited use. If thoughtfully applied, shared care concepts may achieve a broader coverage of patients with diabetics mellitus. Smaller trials investigating sub-issues, and surveys of patients and potential screeners may produce a valuable backdrop in designing appropriate studies. Issues for the development of screening schemes are considered, including the role of training, the development of protocols for care and sharing data, reimbursement and audit. Copyright ©1996 The College of Optometrists. Published by Elsevier Science Ltd [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article provides information on how to use the presbyopic contact lens safely. The author advises the opticians to explain the lens wearer regarding the predictable problems, which includes the initial reduction in comfort caused by the lenses usually being larger or thicker, and how to position the head and the eyes to make the most effective use of the lenses. The author also advises to avoid bifocals for first-time contact lens wearers and ensure that the patient is markedly presbyopic.