Search

Purpose: To survey paediatric eye care providers to identify current patterns of prescribing for hyperopia. Methods: Paediatric eye care providers were invited, via email, to participate in a survey to evaluate current age‐based refractive error prescribing practices. Questions were designed to determine which factors may influence the survey participant's prescribing pattern (e.g., patient's age, magnitude of hyperopia, patient's symptoms, heterophoria and stereopsis) and if the providers were to prescribe, how much hyperopic correction would they prescribe (e.g., full or partial prescription). The response distributions by profession (optometry and ophthalmology) were compared using the Kolmogorov–Smirnov cumulative distribution function test. Results: Responses were submitted by 738 participants regarding how they prescribe for their hyperopic patients. Most providers within each profession considered similar clinical factors when prescribing. The percentages of optometrists and ophthalmologists who reported considering the factor often differed significantly. Factors considered similarly by both optometrists and ophthalmologists were the presence of symptoms (98.0%, p = 0.14), presence of astigmatism and/or anisometropia (97.5%, p = 0.06) and the possibility of teasing (8.3%, p = 0.49). A wide range of prescribing was observed within each profession, with some providers reporting that they would prescribe for low levels of hyperopia while others reported that they would never prescribe. When prescribing for bilateral hyperopia in children with age‐normal visual acuity and no manifest deviation or symptoms, the threshold for prescribing decreased with age for both professions, with ophthalmologists typically prescribing 1.5–2 D less than optometrists. The threshold for prescribing also decreased for both optometrists and ophthalmologists when children had associated clinical factors (e.g., esophoria or reduced near visual function). Optometrists and ophthalmologists most commonly prescribed based on cycloplegic refraction, although optometrists most commonly prescribed based on both the manifest and cycloplegic refraction for children ≥7 years. Conclusion: Prescribing patterns for paediatric hyperopia vary significantly among eye care providers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: To investigate the outcome of contact lens (CL) fitting in aphakic children following lensectomy for congenital cataract.Method: Retrospective data of 205 aphakic children who visited for CL fitting following lensectomy from 2008 to 2018 were collected. Data includes the demographic details, CL parameters in first and last visit, hours of CL wear, reason for discontinuation of CL, surgical procedures underwent and years of follow up.Results: 205 (148 unilateral and 57 bilateral) aphakic children comprised of age group, < 1 month (n = 48), 1-3 months (n = 37), 3-6 months (n = 68), 6-12 months (n = 10), >12 months (n = 42). 173/205(84.39%) children were fitted with rigid gas permeable (RGP) and 32/205(15.6%) were fitted with soft CL at their first visit. 10 children had shifted to soft CL in their follow-up visits due to intolerance to RGP. 97/205(47.32%) children continued CL (55RGP, 42SCL) till the last follow-up for 2.17 ± 2.36 years and wore lens for 3.7 ± 3.65 h per day. Number of lenses replaced was 2 lenses (median) and maximum of 9 lenses over a period of 1-8 visits. The maximum visual acuity achieved was up to 0.2 log Mar units at the youngest age of 4 years on successful CL wear. 60/205(29.26%) children discontinued lenses at different follow-up visits due to IOL implantation(n = 28),using spectacles due to handling difficulty, child uncooperative to lens wear and lens fitting issues(n = 32). 48/205(23.41%) were lost to follow-up after the first visit. The average K (7.46 ± 0.43 mm) showed significant correlation to lens base curve in first visit (7.48 ± 0.41 mm) whereas flat K (7.71 ± 0.38 mm) showed significant correlation in the last visit (7.46 ± 0.39 mm) (p < 0.005). This was well described by a significant diameter change of 8.68 ± 0.31 mm to 9.42 ± 1.77 mm (p < 0.005) at the first and last visit respectively. The refractive error showed a significant difference between first (27.96 ± 5.33D) and last visit (21.97 ± 6.85D) (p < 0.005).Conclusion: This study witnessed successful contact lens wear in only half of the children. The visual rehabilitation following lensectomy depends on right CL choice and close follow-up. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]