Opportunities and threats to contact lens practice in Spain

OBJECTIVE: An international survey evaluated the opportunities and threats related to contact lens practice reported by eye care professionals worldwide. This study reports on the results specifically found in Spain and how these compare with those from other regions of the world. METHODS: A questionnaire was distributed to eye care practitioners around the world through professional associations. The questionnaire consisted of 9, 5 and 12 questions about opportunities, interventions, and potential threats related to contact lens practice, respectively. RESULTS: A total of 2,408 responses were obtained from practitioners worldwide, of which 436 responses were obtained from Spanish practitioners. Spain was found among the regions with the highest perception of opportunities (median: 6.5/10) along with Australasia, North America, Europe, and South America. Spanish (median: 7.3/10), along with South American practitioners, also reported the highest perception of threats. Continuously updating of knowledge/skills, recommending contact lens wearing options to potential patients, creating an efficient recall system for follow-up examinations and being competent in managing contact lens-related complications were reported as important interventions for contact lens practice growth by Spanish eye care practitioners. CONCLUSIONS: Spain is one of the regions in the world with the highest perception of both opportunities and threats regarding future contact lens practice. As such, Spanish practitioners consider it important to continuously update knowledge/skills and to recommend and educate patients on the benefits of contact lens wear. Online sales were found to be one of the most important concerns reported by both Spanish and eye care practitioners worldwide

Global trends in myopia management attitudes and strategies in clinical practice

PURPOSE: Myopia is a global public health issue; however, no information exists as to how potential myopia retardation strategies are being adopted globally. METHODS: A self-administrated, internet-based questionnaire was distributed in six languages, through professional bodies to eye care practitioners globally. The questions examined: awareness of increasing myopia prevalence, perceived efficacy and adoption of available strategies, and reasons for not adopting specific strategies. RESULTS: Of the 971 respondents, concern was higher (median 9/10) in Asia than in any other continent (7/10, p<0.001) and they considered themselves more active in implementing myopia control strategies (8/10) than Australasia and Europe (7/10), with North (4/10) and South America (5/10) being least proactive (p<0.001). Orthokeratology was perceived to be the most effective method of myopia control, followed by increased time outdoors and pharmaceutical approaches, with under-correction and single vision spectacles felt to be the least effective (p<0.05). Although significant intra-regional differences existed, overall most practitioners 67.5 (±37.8)% prescribed single vision spectacles or contact lenses as the primary mode of correction for myopic patients. The main justifications for their reluctance to prescribe alternatives to single vision refractive corrections were increased cost (35.6%), inadequate information (33.3%) and the unpredictability of outcomes (28.2%). CONCLUSIONS: Regardless of practitioners' awareness of the efficacy of myopia control techniques, the vast majority still prescribe single vision interventions to young myopes. In view of the increasing prevalence of myopia and existing evidence for interventions to slow myopia progression, clear guidelines for myopia management need to be established

Differences in Practitioner Experience, Practice Type, and Profession in Attitudes Toward Growing Contact Lens Practice

OBJECTIVE: To investigate eye care practitioners' attitudes and perceptions toward potential interventions that can enhance contact lens (CL) practice across the world, and how this is influenced by their practice setting. METHODS: A self-administered, anonymized survey was constructed in English and then forward and backward translated into six more languages. The survey was distributed online via social media platforms and mailing lists involving reputed international professional bodies. RESULTS: In total, 2,222 responses from 27 countries with sufficient responses were analyzed (53% females, median age- 37 years). Most of the respondents were optometrists (81.9%) and 47.6% were from stand-alone/independent practices. Median working experience in CL prescribing was 11.0 years (IQR: 18.0, 4-22 years). Over two-third of them declared themselves to be very hopeful (22.9%) or hopeful (45.1%) about the future of their CL practice. Among the potential interventions proposed, continuous update of knowledge and skills and competently managing CL-related complications were rated the most important (median score: 9/10 for each). Practitioners working in national/regional retail chains expressed higher proactivity in recommending CLs (9/10) than those in local chains, hospitals, and universities (for all 8/10, P <0.05). National differences were also identified in eye care practitioner attitudes and perceptions ( P <0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The study provided important information to delineate a variety of elements characterizing CL practice across the world. These insights can serve as a basis to design strategies at national and international levels

Global trends in myopia management attitudes and strategies in clinical practice – 2019 Update

Purpose: A survey in 2015 identified a high level of eye care practitioner concern about myopia with a reported moderately high level of activity, but the vast majority still prescribed single vision interventions to young myopes. This research aimed to update these findings 4 years later. Methods: A self-administrated, internet-based questionnaire was distributed in eight languages, through professional bodies to eye care practitioners globally. The questions examined: awareness of increasing myopia prevalence, perceived efficacy of available strategies and adoption levels of such strategies, and reasons for not adopting specific strategies. Results: Of the 1336 respondents, concern was highest (9.0 ± 1.6; p < 0.001) in Asia and lowest (7.6 ± 2.2; p < 0.001) in Australasia. Practitioners from Asia also considered their clinical practice of myopia control to be the most active (7.7 ± 2.3; p < 0.001), the North American practitioners being the least active (6.3 ± 2.9; p < 0.001). Orthokeratology was perceived to be the most effective method of myopia control, followed by pharmaceutical approaches and approved myopia control soft contact lenses (p < 0.001). Although significant intra-regional differences existed, overall, most practitioners did not consider single-vision distance under-correction to be an effective strategy for attenuating myopia progression (79.6 %), but prescribed single vision spectacles or contact lenses as the primary mode of correction for myopic patients (63.6 ± 21.8 %). The main justifications for their reluctance to prescribe alternatives to single vision refractive corrections were increased cost (20.6 %) and inadequate information (17.6 %). Conclusions: While practitioner concern about myopia and the reported level of activity have increased over the last 4 years, the vast majority of eye care clinicians still prescribe single vision interventions to young myopes. With recent global consensus evidence-based guidelines having been published, it is hoped that this will inform the practice of myopia management in future

Barriers, motivators and enablers for dispensing multifocal contact lenses in Mumbai, India

AbstractPurposeTo understand the potential barriers, motivators and enablers in dispensing multifocal contact lenses (MFCL).MethodTwo focus group discussions were conducted to design questionnaires regarding the prescribing habits for multifocal contact lenses (MFCL). Questions on potential barriers and motivators were included. The questionnaires were distributed among 133 eye care practitioners across Mumbai, India. Practitioners fitting one or less patient per month with MFCL completed the survey describing potential barriers, while those who prescribed more MFCL's per month completed the survey describing enablers and motivators.ResultsResponses from 102 practitioners were received. Most common potential barriers in prescribing MFCL were increased chair time (75%), lack of readily available trials (69%) and limitation in power range (63%). Lack of awareness among patients (90%) was the most common barrier from patients’ outlook. Professional satisfaction (88%) and better business proposition (82%) were observed as main motivators while availability of the trials (84%) and correct patient selection (82%) were the major enablers. Graduate Optometrists felt dispensing MFCL did not offer a good business proposition (p=0.02). Experienced practitioners were observed to be least motivated (p=0.01) and believed that their patients found these lenses expensive (p=0.02).ConclusionTo enhance the MFCL practice, barriers like lack of awareness and limitations in power range must be addressed. Trial lens availability may motivate practitioners to prescribe MFCL. Further probing is required to understand lack of motivation among experienced practitioners

Adequacy and relevance of Indian optometry curricula to practicing optometrists

Context: To ensure that future optometry graduates receive appropriate knowledge and skills to provide comprehensive primary eye care, it is important to evaluate the current optometry curricula. Aim: To evaluate the relevance of optometry curriculum in India by assessing the perceptions on the curriculum strengths and lacunae by practicing optometrists. Setting and Design: Questionnaire-based survey in India. Materials and Methods: A questionnaire was used to elicit the opinions of purposively selected, 4-year trained optometrists, on the adequacy, and relevance of the optometric curriculum subjects offered in the optometric institutions. Statistical Analysis Used: Descriptive analysis was used to show reported frequencies of single responses to questions. The Cronbach's alpha test was used to measure consistency of responses to questions. Results: One hundred and three valid complete responses were received. Fifty eight (56%) participating optometrists were females. The most adequately covered optometry subjects as reported by the participating optometrists were contact lenses (n = 87, 85%), refraction (n = 86, 84%), ocular investigation (n = 75, 73%), and ocular disease (n = 75, 73%). Ocular diseases, low vision, and dispensing optics were, reportedly, covered sufficiently in theory, but the participants lacked adequate practical exposure. Basic optics had a maximum score regarding practical exposure, among support subjects while communication skills, computer skills, and community optometry were rated very low. Business aspect and legal aspect were inadequately taught. The optometry curricula in India are considered as being adequate and relevant, some subjects need more practical demonstrations and teaching of support subjects needs amendments

Opportunities and threats to contact lens practice: A global survey perspective

Aim: To understand the views of contact lens (CL) practitioners across the globe regarding what they perceive as opportunities and threats in CL practice. Methods: A self-administered anonymised questionnaire, constructed in English and translated in six more languages, was distributed through reputed international professional bodies and academic institutions worldwide. The questionnaire included items on demographic characteristics, type of practice, and questions designed to explore practitioners' perspective on the future of their CL practice over the next five years. Results: A total of 2408 valid responses were analysed. Multifocal CLs for presbyopia, CLs for myopia control, use of daily disposable (DD) CLs for occasional wear, and biocompatible materials to improve comfort were identified as promising areas of opportunities by practitioners (all 8/10). Respondents from North America, and Europe valued DDCLs for occasional wear moderately more favourable (Median: 9/10 for all) as compared to colleagues in Asia (Median: 8/10, p < 0.001), South America (Median: 8/10, p < 0.01), and Africa (Median: 8/10p < 0.01). Multifocal CLs for presbyopia was perceived as a better opportunity by practitioners in North America and Europe (Median: 9/10 for both), as well as in Australasia (Median: 8/10), in comparison to Asia, Africa, and Middle East (for all Median: 6/10, p < 0.001). Practitioners expressed concerns about the availability of CLs and CL prescriptions online without direct professional involvement (both 9/10). Conclusions: Overall, the most appealing opportunities for CL practice growth were identified in occasional use of DD CLs, biocompatible materials to reduce CL discomfort, multifocal CLs for presbyopia correction and management of myopia control with CLs. Lack of regulation in CL sales, especially online, seemed to be a constant threat. The insights from this study can be used to design targeted strategies to enhance CL practice across the globe and in specific geographical areas.Sin financiación3.946 Q2 JCR 20210.581 Q2 SJR 2021No data IDR 2021UE