Mera F Haddad1, May Bakkar2, Yazan Gammoh3, Philip Morgan4. 1. Faculty of Applied Medical Sciences, Department of Allied Medical Sciences, Jordan University of Science and Technology, Irbid 22110, Jordan. Electronic address: mfhaddad@just.edu.jo. 2. Faculty of Applied Medical Sciences, Department of Allied Medical Sciences, Jordan University of Science and Technology, Irbid 22110, Jordan. 3. Faculty of Pharmacy, Department of Optometry, Amman Al Ahliya University, Amman, Jordan. 4. Eurolens Research, The University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate contact lens prescribing trends among optometrists in Jordan. METHODS: Optometrists from 173 practices in Jordan were surveyed about prescribing contact lenses in their practice. Practitioners were required to record information for the last 10 patients that visited their practice. Demographic data such as age and gender was obtained for each patient. In addition, data relating to lens type, lens design, replacement methods and the care regime advised to each patient were recorded. Practitioners were required to provide information relating to their education and years of experience. The influence of education and experience with respect to lens prescribing trends was explored using linear regression models for the proportions of lens types fitted for patients. RESULTS: A total of 1730 contact lens fits were analyzed. The mean (±SD) age of lens wearers was 26.6 (±7.9) years, of whom 65% were female. Conventional hydrogel lenses were the most prescribed lenses, accounting for 60.3% of the fits, followed by silicone hydrogel lenses (31.3%), and rigid lenses (8.4%). In terms of lens design, spherical lenses appeared to be most commonly prescribed on monthly basis. Daily disposable lenses were second most prescribed lens modality, accounting for 20.4% of the study sample. Multi-purpose solution (MPS) was the preferred care regimen, with a prevalence of 88.1% reported in the study sample, compared to hydrogen peroxide (1-step and 2-step), which represented only 2.8% of the patients in this study. A relationship was established between the two educational groups for rigid lens prescribing (F=17.4, p<0.0001), while the experience of the optometrist was not a significant factor (F=0.4, p=0.54). CONCLUSION: This work has provides an up-to-date analysis of contact lens prescribing trends among optometrists in Jordan. Contact lens prescribing in terms of lens type, lens design, modality of wear and care regimen agree with global market trends with small variations. This report will help practitioners and the industry to detect any deficiencies in the contact lens market in Jordan, which will ease implementing current and future plans in developing contact lens practice and patient eye care in the region.
PURPOSE: To evaluate contact lens prescribing trends among optometrists in Jordan. METHODS: Optometrists from 173 practices in Jordan were surveyed about prescribing contact lenses in their practice. Practitioners were required to record information for the last 10 patients that visited their practice. Demographic data such as age and gender was obtained for each patient. In addition, data relating to lens type, lens design, replacement methods and the care regime advised to each patient were recorded. Practitioners were required to provide information relating to their education and years of experience. The influence of education and experience with respect to lens prescribing trends was explored using linear regression models for the proportions of lens types fitted for patients. RESULTS: A total of 1730 contact lens fits were analyzed. The mean (±SD) age of lens wearers was 26.6 (±7.9) years, of whom 65% were female. Conventional hydrogel lenses were the most prescribed lenses, accounting for 60.3% of the fits, followed by silicone hydrogel lenses (31.3%), and rigid lenses (8.4%). In terms of lens design, spherical lenses appeared to be most commonly prescribed on monthly basis. Daily disposable lenses were second most prescribed lens modality, accounting for 20.4% of the study sample. Multi-purpose solution (MPS) was the preferred care regimen, with a prevalence of 88.1% reported in the study sample, compared to hydrogen peroxide (1-step and 2-step), which represented only 2.8% of the patients in this study. A relationship was established between the two educational groups for rigid lens prescribing (F=17.4, p<0.0001), while the experience of the optometrist was not a significant factor (F=0.4, p=0.54). CONCLUSION: This work has provides an up-to-date analysis of contact lens prescribing trends among optometrists in Jordan. Contact lens prescribing in terms of lens type, lens design, modality of wear and care regimen agree with global market trends with small variations. This report will help practitioners and the industry to detect any deficiencies in the contact lens market in Jordan, which will ease implementing current and future plans in developing contact lens practice and patient eye care in the region.