Search

Objective This article describes a formal ophthalmology residency mentorship program, identifies its strengths and weaknesses over 5 years of implementation, and proposes strategies to improve qualitative outcomes of the mentorship program. Design Cross-sectional anonymous online survey. Subjects All current and former mentees and mentors at the Casey Eye Institute (CEI) residency program from 2016 to 2021. Methods All eligible participants were contacted via email to complete a survey to describe and analyze their experiences with the CEI's formal residency mentorship program. Results Of the 65 surveyed participants, 82% preferred in-person meetings and met up from 2 to 3 times (44%) to 4 to 6 times (38.5%) annually at 15 minutes to 1 hour (48%) or 1 to 2 hours (42%) duration. Sixty-two percent of meetings were initiated by mentors, 8% by mentees, and 32% shared responsibilities equally. Participants also identified the three most important qualities for successful mentor-mentee relationship as personality (33.6%), communication styles (29.2%), and extracurricular interests/hobbies (16.8%). Mentees valued career advising, networking, and wellness support over academic and research mentorship. Subjective outcomes showed 25% of the mentee and 43% of the mentors agreed the mentorship program was a valuable experience. Comparably, 14% of the mentees and 38% of the mentors prioritized the relationship. There was a strong correlation between participants who prioritized the relationship and acknowledged it as a valuable experience (p

Purpose: To describe cases of significant vision loss after intravitreal aflibercept administration using prefilled syringes (PFS) and to study the relationships among syringe design, injection speed, and injection force. Design: Retrospective case series and experimental study. Participants: Twelve patients who received intravitreal aflibercept via PFS. Methods: All retina specialists (n = 13) at Oregon Health & Science University and the Veterans Affairs Portland Medical Center were queried in December 2020 to report episodes of significant vision loss after aflibercept PFS use. Chart review was completed for all affected patients. Using a commercially available force measuring system, injection force was measured for aflibercept PFS, ranibizumab PFS, and a tuberculin syringe at various injection speeds. Main Outcome Measures: Number of significant vision loss episodes after aflibercept PFS use and average injection force (Newtons) at various injection speeds across different syringes. Results: Ten specialists (76.9%) reported a perceived increase in vision loss after injection with aflibercept PFS. Sixteen events of light perception or worse vision were reported immediate after aflibercept PFS use. Chart review was available for 12 of these events. The indication for aflibercept was exudative age-related macular degeneration (n = 8), diabetic macular edema (n = 3), and central serous chorioretinopathy (n = 1). The median age of affected patients was 71 years (range, 49–94 years). Two patients were being treated for glaucoma (n = 1) or ocular hypertension (n = 1); 1 patient was a glaucoma suspect. Anterior chamber paracentesis was performed in 4 patients to normalize intraocular pressure (IOP) promptly. Laboratory experiments demonstrated that higher injection speeds were associated with higher injection forces for all syringe types. Injection forces were consistently greater with aflibercept PFS than with the ranibizumab PFS or tuberculin syringe (P < 0.0001). Conclusions: Retina specialists at our institutions have noted numerous cases of severe transient vision loss with aflibercept PFS use. The average injection force may be greater with the aflibercept PFS when compared with other intravitreal anti–vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) options. Additional clinical studies are needed to understand better how syringe design and fluid dynamics may contribute to vision loss after injection.