Literature DB >> 15877103

National Biometry Audit II.

R P Gale1, N Saha, R L Johnston.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To determine the change in compliance with the Royal College of Ophthalmologists biometry guidelines since the last National Audit 2 years ago and in particular to quantify the adoption of modern methods of axial length measurement and customization of A constants.
METHOD: A structured telephone questionnaire of individuals who perform biometry in all eye departments in the United Kingdom.
RESULTS: A biometrist was interviewed in 94 of the 178 United Kingdom Ophthalmology departments. Compared with 2 years ago, nurses alone perform biometry more frequently (67 vs 51%) and junior doctors less frequently (9 vs 15%). More biometrists now attend external training courses (45 vs 37%). The Royal College of Ophthalmologists recommended intraocular lens calculation formulae (SRK-T, Hoffer Q, and Holladay) are used more commonly (30 and 15%) and audit of prediction error is being performed more frequently (78 vs 71%). The routine use of a partial coherence laser interferometry has increased from 35 to 61% in United Kingdom Ophthalmology departments. Currently, only one United Kingdom department is routinely using immersion ultrasound biometry. 'A' constants are customized in 47% of departments.
CONCLUSION: Over the last 2 years, there has been improved implementation of the Royal College of Ophthalmologists guidelines on biometry. It is essential that the Royal College of Ophthalmologists guidelines are updated to include current best practice of routine use of partial coherence laser interferometry or immersion biometry and customization of A constants. A benchmark standard of 85-90% of patients achieving a final postoperative refraction within 1 dioptre of the predicted should be established.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 15877103     DOI: 10.1038/sj.eye.6701778

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eye (Lond)        ISSN: 0950-222X            Impact factor:   3.775


  5 in total

1.  How to avoid mistakes in biometry.

Authors:  Nick Astbury; Balasubramanya Ramamurthy
Journal:  Community Eye Health       Date:  2006-12

2.  Paediatric intraocular lens implants: accuracy of lens power calculations.

Authors:  M K O'Gallagher; M A Lagan; C P Mulholland; M Parker; G McGinnity; E M McLoone
Journal:  Eye (Lond)       Date:  2016-07-29       Impact factor: 3.775

Review 3.  Optimising biometry for best outcomes in cataract surgery.

Authors:  R Sheard
Journal:  Eye (Lond)       Date:  2013-12-06       Impact factor: 3.775

4.  Comparison of ocular biometry measurements by applanation and immersion A-scan techniques.

Authors:  Dupe S Ademola-Popoola; Donald A Nzeh; Sadiat E Saka; Lateefat B Olokoba; Tokunbo S Obajolowo
Journal:  J Curr Ophthalmol       Date:  2016-02-09

5.  Cataract surgery outcomes: comparison of the extracapsular cataract extraction and manual small incision cataract surgery techniques.

Authors:  Amukelani Jimmy Zitha; Nishanee Rampersad
Journal:  Afr Health Sci       Date:  2022-03       Impact factor: 1.108

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.