PURPOSE: To compare self-administration of drops in both visually impaired glaucoma subjects and retina subjects. DESIGN: Prospective, observational study. SETTING: Distinct glaucoma and retina practices. STUDY POPULATION: Subjects with glaucoma or retinal diseases with visual acuity of 20/60 or worse in 1 eye, significant field loss, or both. OBSERVATION PROCEDURES: Subjects were video recorded self-instilling a drop onto the worse eye. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Proper instillation of eye drop onto ocular surface. RESULTS: We included 409 subjects (205 glaucoma, 204 retina). Differences between the groups included the following: glaucoma subjects included fewer females (P = .05), included fewer white persons (P < .005), had worse visual acuity (P < .005), had less self-reported arthritis (P < .05), were younger (P < .005), and had more previous exposure to drop use (P < .005). Glaucoma subjects had more bilateral impairment (60% vs 42%; P < .0005). Retina subjects instilled more drops (1.7 vs 1.4; P = .02) and more frequently touched the bottle to the eye (47% vs 33%; P = .003). Of subjects claiming not to miss the eye, nearly one third from each group (P = .32) actually missed. Approximately one third of each group could not get a drop onto the eye (30% retina vs 29% glaucoma; P = .91). Among subjects placing 1 drop onto the eye without touching the adnexae, there was a trend for glaucoma patients to perform better, although both groups did poorly (success, 39% glaucoma vs 31% retina; P = .09). CONCLUSIONS: Among visually impaired subjects, regardless of cause, drop administration was a problem. Both groups wasted drops, contaminated bottles, and had inaccurate perception of their abilities. This has implications for future therapeutic delivery systems.
PURPOSE: To compare self-administration of drops in both visually impaired glaucoma subjects and retina subjects. DESIGN: Prospective, observational study. SETTING: Distinct glaucoma and retina practices. STUDY POPULATION: Subjects with glaucoma or retinal diseases with visual acuity of 20/60 or worse in 1 eye, significant field loss, or both. OBSERVATION PROCEDURES: Subjects were video recorded self-instilling a drop onto the worse eye. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Proper instillation of eye drop onto ocular surface. RESULTS: We included 409 subjects (205 glaucoma, 204 retina). Differences between the groups included the following: glaucoma subjects included fewer females (P = .05), included fewer white persons (P < .005), had worse visual acuity (P < .005), had less self-reported arthritis (P < .05), were younger (P < .005), and had more previous exposure to drop use (P < .005). Glaucoma subjects had more bilateral impairment (60% vs 42%; P < .0005). Retina subjects instilled more drops (1.7 vs 1.4; P = .02) and more frequently touched the bottle to the eye (47% vs 33%; P = .003). Of subjects claiming not to miss the eye, nearly one third from each group (P = .32) actually missed. Approximately one third of each group could not get a drop onto the eye (30% retina vs 29% glaucoma; P = .91). Among subjects placing 1 drop onto the eye without touching the adnexae, there was a trend for glaucomapatients to perform better, although both groups did poorly (success, 39% glaucoma vs 31% retina; P = .09). CONCLUSIONS: Among visually impaired subjects, regardless of cause, drop administration was a problem. Both groups wasted drops, contaminated bottles, and had inaccurate perception of their abilities. This has implications for future therapeutic delivery systems.
Authors: A M Eaton; G M Gordon; A Konowal; A Allen; M Allen; A Sgarlata; G Gao; H Wafapoor; R L Avery Journal: Eye (Lond) Date: 2015-09-11 Impact factor: 3.775
Authors: Paula Anne Newman-Casey; Taylor Blachley; Paul P Lee; Michele Heisler; Karen B Farris; Joshua D Stein Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 2015-08-25 Impact factor: 12.079
Authors: Paula Anne Newman-Casey; Alan L Robin; Taylor Blachley; Karen Farris; Michele Heisler; Ken Resnicow; Paul P Lee Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 2015-04-24 Impact factor: 12.079
Authors: Ronald L Fellman; Cynthia Mattox; Kuldev Singh; Brian Flowers; Brian A Francis; Alan L Robin; Michelle R Butler; Manjool M Shah; JoAnn A Giaconi; Arsham Sheybani; Brian J Song; Joshua D Stein Journal: Ophthalmol Glaucoma Date: 2020 Jan - Feb
Authors: Robyn Sayner; Delesha M Carpenter; Alan L Robin; Susan J Blalock; Kelly W Muir; Michelle Vitko; Mary Elizabeth Hartnett; Scott D Lawrence; Annette L Giangiacomo; Gail Tudor; Jason A Goldsmith; Betsy Sleath Journal: Int J Pharm Pract Date: 2015-08-25
Authors: Kevin J Schneider; Cecilia N Hollenhorst; Autumn N Valicevic; Leslie M Niziol; Michele Heisler; David C Musch; Stephen M Cain; Paula-Anne Newman-Casey Journal: Ophthalmol Glaucoma Date: 2020-08-08
Authors: Nathan Gooch; Sarah A Molokhia; Russell Condie; Randon Michael Burr; Bonnie Archer; Balamurali K Ambati; Barbara Wirostko Journal: Pharmaceutics Date: 2012-03-08 Impact factor: 6.321