A Akman1, P Aydin. 1. Başkent University Faculty of Medicine, Department of Ophthalmology, Ankara, Turkey. ahmetakman@hotmail.com
Abstract
PURPOSE: To determine whether the mydriatic efficacy of spray application of tropicamide 1% is comparable to drop instillation of tropicamide 1%, and to compare the ocular discomfort caused by these methods. METHODS:Thirty-four healthy volunteers were randomly assigned to one of two groups, and received either a single drop of tropicamide 1% eye drops or a single puff of tropicamide 1% spray into open eyes. Pupil diameters were measured from anterior segment images taken using a Topcon Imagenet system at baseline and at the fifth, tenth and fifteenth minute after drug administration. Ocular discomfort experienced with each method was also compared. RESULTS: Repeated measures analysis of variance revealed that a statistically significant increase in pupil diameter was achieved with both application methods over time (p < 0.0001), and that there were no statistically significant differences in pupil diameter between the two groups at each time point (p = 0.409). The mean ocular discomfort score for tropicamide 1% spray was 1.45 +/- 0.56, and for tropicamide 1% eye drops was 2.71 +/- 0.67. This difference was statistically significant (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The mydriatic efficacy of tropicamide 1% spray is similar to that of conventional tropicamide 1% eye drops, and spray application causes less ocular discomfort.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: To determine whether the mydriatic efficacy of spray application of tropicamide 1% is comparable to drop instillation of tropicamide 1%, and to compare the ocular discomfort caused by these methods. METHODS: Thirty-four healthy volunteers were randomly assigned to one of two groups, and received either a single drop of tropicamide 1% eye drops or a single puff of tropicamide 1% spray into open eyes. Pupil diameters were measured from anterior segment images taken using a Topcon Imagenet system at baseline and at the fifth, tenth and fifteenth minute after drug administration. Ocular discomfort experienced with each method was also compared. RESULTS: Repeated measures analysis of variance revealed that a statistically significant increase in pupil diameter was achieved with both application methods over time (p < 0.0001), and that there were no statistically significant differences in pupil diameter between the two groups at each time point (p = 0.409). The mean ocular discomfort score for tropicamide 1% spray was 1.45 +/- 0.56, and for tropicamide 1% eye drops was 2.71 +/- 0.67. This difference was statistically significant (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The mydriatic efficacy of tropicamide 1% spray is similar to that of conventional tropicamide 1% eye drops, and spray application causes less ocular discomfort.