BACKGROUND/ OBJECTIVES: To survey the members of the American Glaucoma Society (AGS) to determine which glaucoma procedures they would prefer to have performed on themselves. SUBJECTS/ METHODS: We distributed an anonymous, electronic survey via the AGS listserv. The participants were asked to adopt the role of a patient with primary open angle glaucoma with progressive visual field loss in need of glaucoma surgery. Three preoperative intraocular pressure (IOP) levels were provided (>26 mmHg, 21-26 mmHg, and <21 mmHg), and the participants were asked to choose a glaucoma procedure they would prefer performed on themselves under each preoperative IOP levels from a list of fifteen procedures. RESULTS: Out of 289 responses (representing 27.4% of active and provisional AGS members), the most preferred procedures were ab interno trabeculotomy (20.3%), Xen gel stent (18.6%), iStent with two devices (14.3%) and traditional trabeculectomy augmented with mitomycin C (14.1%). 17.6% and 6.9% of participants preferred a trabeculectomy performed or a glaucoma drainage device (GDD) implanted on themselves, which is a lower than what would be offered to a hypothetical patient. Significant proportions of participants prefer non-bleb forming or conjunctiva-sparing procedures, even with low preoperative IOP levels. Older participants were more likely to prefer traditional trabeculectomy and having a single procedure across all levels of preoperative IOP. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of AGS participants in the survey would prefer micro-invasive glaucoma surgery over traditional trabeculectomy or a GDD performed on themselves as a primary glaucoma procedure, and most would prefer non-bleb forming and conjunctiva-sparing procedures.
BACKGROUND/ OBJECTIVES: To survey the members of the American Glaucoma Society (AGS) to determine which glaucoma procedures they would prefer to have performed on themselves. SUBJECTS/ METHODS: We distributed an anonymous, electronic survey via the AGS listserv. The participants were asked to adopt the role of a patient with primary open angle glaucoma with progressive visual field loss in need of glaucoma surgery. Three preoperative intraocular pressure (IOP) levels were provided (>26 mmHg, 21-26 mmHg, and <21 mmHg), and the participants were asked to choose a glaucoma procedure they would prefer performed on themselves under each preoperative IOP levels from a list of fifteen procedures. RESULTS: Out of 289 responses (representing 27.4% of active and provisional AGS members), the most preferred procedures were ab interno trabeculotomy (20.3%), Xen gel stent (18.6%), iStent with two devices (14.3%) and traditional trabeculectomy augmented with mitomycin C (14.1%). 17.6% and 6.9% of participants preferred a trabeculectomy performed or a glaucoma drainage device (GDD) implanted on themselves, which is a lower than what would be offered to a hypothetical patient. Significant proportions of participants prefer non-bleb forming or conjunctiva-sparing procedures, even with low preoperative IOP levels. Older participants were more likely to prefer traditional trabeculectomy and having a single procedure across all levels of preoperative IOP. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of AGS participants in the survey would prefer micro-invasive glaucoma surgery over traditional trabeculectomy or a GDD performed on themselves as a primary glaucoma procedure, and most would prefer non-bleb forming and conjunctiva-sparing procedures.
Authors: Karen W Jeng; John Wilgucki; Scott Halperin; William J Feuer; Howard F Fine; Daniel Roth; Jonathan L Prenner Journal: Retina Date: 2014-09 Impact factor: 4.256
Authors: Davinder S Grover; David G Godfrey; Oluwatosin Smith; William J Feuer; Ildamaris Montes de Oca; Ronald L Fellman Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 2014-01-10 Impact factor: 12.079
Authors: Kateki Vinod; Steven J Gedde; William J Feuer; Joseph F Panarelli; Ta C Chang; Philip P Chen; Richard K Parrish Journal: J Glaucoma Date: 2017-08 Impact factor: 2.503
Authors: Marlene D Wang; Karen W Jeng-Miller; Henry L Feng; Jonathan L Prenner; Howard F Fine; Sumit P Shah Journal: Br J Ophthalmol Date: 2015-12-30 Impact factor: 4.638
Authors: Steven J Gedde; William J Feuer; Wei Shi; Kin Sheng Lim; Keith Barton; Saurabh Goyal; Iqbal I K Ahmed; James Brandt Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 2018-02-21 Impact factor: 12.079
Authors: Ta C Chang; Richard K Parrish; Danielle Fujino; Scott P Kelly; Elizabeth A Vanner Journal: Am J Ophthalmol Date: 2020-10-10 Impact factor: 5.258
Authors: Jan Luebke; Daniel Boehringer; Alexandra Anton; Moritz Daniel; Thomas Reinhard; Stefan Lang Journal: Clin Epidemiol Date: 2021-07-13 Impact factor: 4.790