PURPOSE: To survey ophthalmologists in the European Union to determine their fixed combination (FC) preferences. METHODS: A multiple-choice survey was sent to randomly chosen ophthalmologists throughout the European Union and bordering countries by electronic mail delivery. Ophthalmologists were resent the survey on two more occasions if no response was obtained. RESULTS:In total, 50 surveys were received from 530 distributed (9.4% response) from 16 countries. More ophthalmologists prescribed an FC as second (80%) or third choice (64%) therapy than first choice (30%, p=0.0036). As first (p<0.0001) and third choice (p=0.011), the dorzolamide/timolol FC was most commonly prescribed, while as second choice the latanoprost/timolol FC (p<0.0001) was most popular. Overall, 98% (49/50) of doctors believed FC therapy improved patient care most often by better compliance (n=49) and quality of life(n=48, p<0.0001). Most ophthalmologists believed that there was a difference in efficacy between the FC products (32/50, 64%) with the most effective being the bimatoprost/timolol FC (n=12, 24%, p=0.029). However, fewer ophthalmologists perceived safety differences between the products (34/50, 68%). For prostaglandins, dosing time was suggested in the morning by 18 (36%) ophthalmologists and in the evening by 24 (48%) (p=0.35). CONCLUSIONS: FCs in the European Union are a potentially popular method to reduce intraocular pressure, being prescribed most commonly as second or third choice therapy. The perceived advantages to FC therapy are greater adherence to the medicine and improved patient quality of life.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: To survey ophthalmologists in the European Union to determine their fixed combination (FC) preferences. METHODS: A multiple-choice survey was sent to randomly chosen ophthalmologists throughout the European Union and bordering countries by electronic mail delivery. Ophthalmologists were resent the survey on two more occasions if no response was obtained. RESULTS: In total, 50 surveys were received from 530 distributed (9.4% response) from 16 countries. More ophthalmologists prescribed an FC as second (80%) or third choice (64%) therapy than first choice (30%, p=0.0036). As first (p<0.0001) and third choice (p=0.011), the dorzolamide/timololFC was most commonly prescribed, while as second choice the latanoprost/timololFC (p<0.0001) was most popular. Overall, 98% (49/50) of doctors believed FC therapy improved patient care most often by better compliance (n=49) and quality of life(n=48, p<0.0001). Most ophthalmologists believed that there was a difference in efficacy between the FC products (32/50, 64%) with the most effective being the bimatoprost/timololFC (n=12, 24%, p=0.029). However, fewer ophthalmologists perceived safety differences between the products (34/50, 68%). For prostaglandins, dosing time was suggested in the morning by 18 (36%) ophthalmologists and in the evening by 24 (48%) (p=0.35). CONCLUSIONS: FCs in the European Union are a potentially popular method to reduce intraocular pressure, being prescribed most commonly as second or third choice therapy. The perceived advantages to FC therapy are greater adherence to the medicine and improved patient quality of life.