-
Journal of AAPOS : the Official... Apr 2023Economic evaluations in health care quantitatively compare interventions using cost and outcomes data. These evaluations can aid in the adoption of new surgical or... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Economic evaluations in health care quantitatively compare interventions using cost and outcomes data. These evaluations can aid in the adoption of new surgical or medical treatments and inform policy decisions regarding healthcare spending. Several common types of economic analysis exist (cost-benefit, cost-analysis, cost-effectiveness, and cost-utility). We review all English-language economic evaluations in strabismus surgery and pediatric ophthalmology.
METHODS
An electronic literature search of the PubMed and Health Economic Evaluations databases was conducted. Two reviewers independently reviewed the search string yield and assessed articles against inclusion and exclusion criteria. Outcome measures included journal of publication, year of publication, domain of ophthalmology, region/country of study, and type of economic evaluation.
RESULTS
We identified 62 articles. Cost-utility studies comprised 30% of evaluations. The most studied domain was retinopathy of prematurity (33%), followed by amblyopia and vision screening (24%) and cataracts (14%). The Journal of the American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus published the most economic evaluations (15%) followed by Ophthalmology and Pediatrics. The number of published economic evaluations did not increase over time.
CONCLUSIONS
Economic evaluations in pediatric ophthalmology and strabismus have not increased over time. A minority (30%) of studies used cost utility-analysis, limiting comparisons to other domains of medicine. This suggests the need to alert pediatric ophthalmologists to the benefits of economic analysis, and cost-utility methodology specifically, to better inform and influence policy decisions regarding healthcare spending.
Topics: Child; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Amblyopia; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Delivery of Health Care; Ophthalmology; Strabismus
PubMed: 36940859
DOI: 10.1016/j.jaapos.2022.12.005 -
Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) Jan 2022: Irreversible visual impairment is mainly caused by retinal degenerative diseases such as age-related macular degeneration and retinitis pigmentosa. Stem cell research... (Review)
Review
: Irreversible visual impairment is mainly caused by retinal degenerative diseases such as age-related macular degeneration and retinitis pigmentosa. Stem cell research has experienced rapid progress in recent years, and researchers and clinical ophthalmologists are trying to implement this promising technology to treat retinal degeneration. The objective of this systematic review is to analyze currently available data from clinical trials applying stem cells to treat human retinal diseases. : We performed a systematic literature search in PubMed to identify articles related with stem cell therapies to retinal diseases published prior to September 2021. Furthermore, a systematic search in ClinicalTrials (NIH U.S. National Library of Medicine) was performed to identify clinical trials using stem cells to treat retinal diseases. A descriptive analysis of status, conditions, phases, interventions, and outcomes is presented here. To date, no available therapy based on stem cell transplantation is approved for use with patients. However, numerous clinical trials are currently finishing their initial phases and, in general, the outcomes related to implantation techniques and their long-term safety seem promising. In the next few years, we expect to see quantifiable results pertaining to visual function improvement.
Topics: Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation; Humans; Macular Degeneration; Retina; Retinal Degeneration; Stem Cell Transplantation; United States
PubMed: 35056410
DOI: 10.3390/medicina58010102 -
Eye (London, England) Jul 2020We aimed to estimate the supply of ophthalmologists in relation to the global and regional burden of vision-threatening diabetic retinopathy (VTDR). Diabetes mellitus... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
We aimed to estimate the supply of ophthalmologists in relation to the global and regional burden of vision-threatening diabetic retinopathy (VTDR). Diabetes mellitus (DM) population data from seven world regions were obtained from the International Diabetes Federation Atlas 2017. A systematic review was performed to include population-, community-based studies that reported country-specific VTDR prevalence. Random effect meta-analysis was then performed to estimate global and regional VTDR prevalence. VTDR prevalence estimates coupled with DM population data were then used to estimate the number of VTDR cases. Global and regional number of ophthalmologists were derived from the International Council of Ophthalmology Report 2015. Fifty studies (17 from Western Pacific [WP], nine North America and Caribbean [NAC], nine Middle East and North Africa [MENA], five Europe, eight South East Asia [SEA], one South and Central America [SACA] and one from Africa) were included. Global VTDR prevalence was 7.26% (95% CI, 6.18-8.32%). Regional VTDR prevalence was 14.35% in Africa, 11.21% in MENA, 10.00% in NAC, 6.32% in Europe, 6.22% in WP, 5.83% in SACA and 2.97% in SEA. Globally, there were 7.16 ophthalmologists per 1000 VTDR patients. Europe had the highest ophthalmologist per 1000 VTDR patient ratio at 18.03 followed by SACA (17.41), while NAC, MENA and Africa had the lowest at 4.90, 4.81 and 0.91 respectively. Across regions, the ophthalmologist densities ranged from 0.91 to 18.03 per 1000 VTDR patients, with NAC, MENA and Africa having less than 5 ophthalmologists per 1000 patients. These findings will aid global and regional policy planning and healthcare resource allocation for VTDR management.
Topics: Africa; Diabetes Mellitus; Diabetic Retinopathy; Ethnicity; Humans; Ophthalmologists; Prevalence
PubMed: 31992863
DOI: 10.1038/s41433-020-0776-5 -
Journal of Family Medicine and Primary... Sep 2022The COVID-19 pandemic has led to the development and rollout of several vaccines worldwide at unprecedented pace. This systematic review of published literature has been... (Review)
Review
The COVID-19 pandemic has led to the development and rollout of several vaccines worldwide at unprecedented pace. This systematic review of published literature has been undertaken to spread awareness among general physicians and ophthalmologists about the various reported adverse effects in the eye following COVID-19 vaccination. A systematic search was performed on 25 January 2022 through PuBMed, Medline and Google scholar for publications on ocular adverse effects after COVID-19 vaccination. One brief communication, four retrospective case series, sixteen case reports, and five letters to editors were included. Ocular manifestations most commonly appear in the uvea and retina. Other manifestations are seen on the eyelid, cornea and ocular surface, and in cranial nerves innervating the eye. The incidence rate of these manifestations is quite low after COVID-19 vaccinations. Our systematic review meticulously enumerates various adverse effects of COVID -19 vaccine on the eye. Most of these adverse effects are transient and observed to resolve without any sequelae except for cases of retinal and ophthalmic vascular occlusions and corneal graft rejections. An emphasis on close follow-up and a need to delay vaccination and modified therapy to control flare up of signs and symptoms in certain sub-populations, Graves' disease (autoimmune etiology), pre-existing uveal inflammation and corneal graft cases are warranted. We need long-term, larger, multicentric studies to substantiate our findings and establish the causal relationship with certainty. Mass vaccinations to curb this pandemic after outweighing the ocular risks associated with it is warranted.
PubMed: 36505575
DOI: 10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_747_22 -
Journal of Ophthalmology 2022Alport syndrome (AS) is a severe, rare hereditary disorder that can lead to end-stage renal disease, auditory degeneration, and ocular abnormalities. Despite extensive... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVES
Alport syndrome (AS) is a severe, rare hereditary disorder that can lead to end-stage renal disease, auditory degeneration, and ocular abnormalities. Despite extensive research on AS in relation to auditory and renal disorders, more research is needed on the ocular presentations of AS. This systematic review aims to summarize the common ocular abnormalities in patients with AS and to explore the potential treatment options for these irregularities.
METHODS
The PubMed, MEDLINE, and EMBASE databases were systematically searched from January 1977 to April 2022. Only papers that were published in the English language and explored the ocular abnormalities in AS patients were selected. We manually searched reference lists of included papers for additional studies.
RESULTS
A total of 23 articles involving 195 patients were included in this review. The common ocular manifestations in AS patients are lenticonus, macular holes, fleck retinopathy, and thinning of the macula. Although published literature has described the use of cataract surgeries and vitrectomies as standard surgical techniques to alleviate ocular abnormalities in non-AS patients, it must be noted that surgical techniques have not been evaluated in a large research study as a solution for AS abnormalities. Another prospective treatment for AS is gene therapy through the reversion of causative variants to wild type or exon-skipping therapy for -linked AS with truncating mutations. Gene therapy, however, remains unable to treat alterations that occur in the fetal and early development phase of the disease.
CONCLUSIONS
The review found no definitive conclusions regarding the efficacy and safety of surgical techniques and gene therapy in AS patients. Recognition of ocular abnormalities through an ophthalmic examination with an optical coherence tomography (OCT) and slit-lamp examination is critical to the medical field, as ophthalmologists can aid nephrologists and other physicians in diagnosing AS. Early diagnosis and care can minimize the risk of detrimental ocular outcomes, such as blindness and retinal detachment.
PubMed: 36119140
DOI: 10.1155/2022/9250367 -
Experimental and Therapeutic Medicine Nov 2021Euthyroid Graves' Disease (EGD) is a challenging pathology, due to its atypical clinical manifestations and the absence of abnormal thyroid function. Typically, thyroid... (Review)
Review
Euthyroid Graves' Disease (EGD) is a challenging pathology, due to its atypical clinical manifestations and the absence of abnormal thyroid function. Typically, thyroid ophthalmopathy is associated with elevated thyroid hormone levels and with the presence of thyrotropin receptor antibodies (TRAb) but a low percentage of patients remain euthyroid without developing hyperthyroidism during long-term follow-up periods. Although it is considered a different pathology, it shares a lot of similarities with Graves' disease, rendering the diagnosis more difficult. It is also important to note that ophthalmopathy may be the first clinical manifestation of Graves' disease and that thyroid function examinations do not present abnormalities over a long period. Treatment choices for euthyroid disease do not differ from those described in Graves' ophthalmopathy. However, it is considered that since euthyroid patients develop milder ophthalmic symptoms and their clinical activity score is lower, they tend to have better responses to treatment. Moreover, atypical sight-threatening cases such as exposure keratopathy and dysthyroid optic neuropathy with variable responses to therapy also exist. Disease management consists of a favorable collaboration between ophthalmologists and endocrinologists because patients with EGD can develop thyroid abnormalities over time. In conclusion, the diagnosis of EGD is difficult, clinical manifestations and evolution are variables depending on several factors, including the heterogeneity of TRAb. This review aimed to identify the characteristics of this disease by reviewing the clinical studies and case reports published in previous years.
PubMed: 34630700
DOI: 10.3892/etm.2021.10781 -
Eye (London, England) Oct 2023In most cases, glaucoma patients require long-term medical and/or surgical treatment. Preference studies investigate how different aspects of glaucoma management, such... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
In most cases, glaucoma patients require long-term medical and/or surgical treatment. Preference studies investigate how different aspects of glaucoma management, such as health or process outcomes, are valued and herewith help stakeholders make care more responsive to patients' needs. As, to our knowledge, no overview of these studies is currently available, this study aims to systematically review and critically appraise these studies.
METHODS
A systematic literature review was conducted using keywords for stated-preference studies and glaucoma up to October 2021. Studies were included if they were original research and used a stated-preference methodology to investigate preferences in patients or healthcare professionals for different aspects of glaucoma management. Data were extracted and summarized. Furthermore, a quality appraisal of the included studies was performed using two validated checklists.
RESULTS
The search yielded 1214 articles after removal of duplicates. Of those, 11 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Studies aimed to elicit preferences for glaucoma treatment (27%), glaucoma related health state valuation (36%), and services (36%) from the patient (91%) or ophthalmologists' perspective (9%). Altogether studies included 69 attributes. The majority of attributes were outcome related (62%), followed by process (32%) and cost attributes (6%). Outcome attributes (e.g., effectiveness) were most often of highest importance to the population.
CONCLUSIONS
This systematic review provides an up-to-date and critical review of stated-preference studies in the field of glaucoma, suggesting that patients have preferences and are willing to trade-off between characteristics, and revealed that outcome attributes are the most influential characteristics of glaucoma management.
Topics: Humans; Glaucoma; Patient Preference
PubMed: 36944711
DOI: 10.1038/s41433-023-02482-3 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Nov 2023Macular holes cause severe impairment of sight. With the aim of improving the outcome of surgery for macular holes, particularly larger macular holes (those measuring... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Macular holes cause severe impairment of sight. With the aim of improving the outcome of surgery for macular holes, particularly larger macular holes (those measuring over 400 μm), a variable period of face-down positioning may be advised. This review is an update of a Cochrane Review published in 2011.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the effect of postoperative face-down positioning on the outcome of surgery for macular hole.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2022, Issue 5), which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Trials Register, Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, the ISRCTN registry, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. There were no date or language restrictions in the electronic searches for trials. We last searched the electronic databases on 25 May 2022.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in which postoperative face-down positioning was compared to no face-down positioning following surgery for macular holes. The primary outcome of interest was closure of the macular hole. Other outcomes of interest included visual outcomes, quality of life outcomes, and the occurrence of adverse events. Pairs of review authors independently selected studies for inclusion, extracted data, assessed risk of bias, and evaluated the certainty of evidence using GRADE.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We analysed dichotomous data as risk ratios (RRs), and continuous data as mean differences (MDs), with 95% confidence intervals (CI). The unit of analysis was eyes.
MAIN RESULTS
We included eight studies allocating a total of 709 eyes (699 participants). There was heterogeneity in study design, including the control group treatment (from no positioning to strict maintenance of other 'face-forward' postures) and surgical procedures (with or without inner limiting membrane peeling, with or without cataract surgery). There were also different durations of positioning, with two studies using 3 days, two studies using 5 days, and three studies using 10 days of face-down positioning. Whilst the overall risk of bias was low, all included studies were judged to be at high or unclear risk of bias due to absence of assessment of adherence to the 'prescribed' intervention of face-down positioning or posturing. The primary outcome of successful anatomical hole closure at one to six months following surgery was reported in 95 of every 100 eyes of participants advised to position face-down for at least three days after surgery, and in 85 of every 100 eyes of participants not advised to position face-down (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.12, 709 eyes, 8 studies, I² = 44%). Amongst the 327 eyes of participants with macular holes of at least 400 μm, hole closure was noted in 94 of every 100 eyes of participants advised to position face-down, and in 84 of every 100 eyes of participants not advised to position face-down (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.26, 5 studies, I² = 62%). Amongst the 129 eyes of participants with macular holes of less than 400 μm, hole closure was noted in 100 of every 100 eyes of participants advised to position face-down, and in 96 of every 100 eyes of participants not advised to position face-down (RR 1.03, CI 0.97 to 1.11, 4 studies, I² = 0%). The certainty of the evidence was low, downgraded for imprecision (CIs including no effect) and study design limitations (with different durations of face-down posturing used in the absence of a dose-response gradient, and limitations in measuring the exposure). Meta-analysis of visual acuity data was challenging given the use of different definitions of postoperative visual outcome across studies. Three studies reported findings by gain in Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) letters (MD 2.04, 95% CI -0.01 to 4.09, very low-certainty evidence). Meta-analyses of quality of life data were not possible because of inconsistency in outcome metrics across studies. One study reported no difference between groups in quality of life, as reported on a validated quality of life metric scale (the National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire - 25 (NEI VFQ-25), between face-down positioning for five days and non-face-down positioning (median NEI VFQ-25 score was 89 (interquartile range (IQR) 76 to 94) in the face-down group versus 87 (IQR 73 to 93) in the non-face-down group (adjusted mean difference on a logistic scale 0.02, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.07, P = 0.41)). Two studies reported increased ease of positioning and less pain in non-face-down positioning groups on non-validated 0-to-10-point visual analogue scores. On an ease-of-positioning score running from 0 (very difficult) to 10 (very easy), there were consistent reports of the discomfort associated with face-down positioning: the median participant-reported ease-of-positioning score was 6 (IQR 4 to 8) in those undergoing 5 days of face-down positioning versus 9 (IQR 7 to 10) in the comparator group (P = 0.01). On a pain score with 0 being pain-free and 10 being in severe pain, mean pain score was 6.52 ± 2.48 in the face-down positioning group versus 2.53 ± 2.6 in the non-face-down positioning group. The adverse event of postoperative nerve compression occurred in less than 1 in every 100 (3 per 1000) participants advised to position face-down, and 0 in every 100 participants not advised to position face-down (699 participants, 8 studies, moderate-certainty evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We identified eight RCTs evaluating face-down positioning following surgery for macular hole. The included studies were not all directly comparable due to differences in the surgical techniques used and the durations of postoperative positioning advised. Low-certainty evidence suggests that face-down positioning may have little or no effect on macular hole closure after surgery. Face-down positioning is a low-risk intervention, with serious adverse events affecting fewer than 1 in 300 people. We suggest that any future trials focus on patients with larger macular holes, with interventions and outcome measures used in previous trials (i.e. with inner limiting membrane peeling, positioning durations of three to five days, and validated quality of life metrics) to allow future meta-analyses to determine any effect with greater precision and confidence.
Topics: Humans; Cataract Extraction; Diabetic Retinopathy; Pain; Retinal Perforations
PubMed: 37987517
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008228.pub3 -
Clinical and Experimental Rheumatology 2021The purpose of this systematic review was to identify existing guidelines for antimalarial prescribing and monitoring, specifically for hydroxychloroquine, and how these... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVES
The purpose of this systematic review was to identify existing guidelines for antimalarial prescribing and monitoring, specifically for hydroxychloroquine, and how these guidelines compare and have evolved over time.
METHODS
A literature search was conducted using Embase and Medline to identify guidelines published from 1946-2018. MeSH terms were used and alternative spelling and related words were entered as keywords to broaden results.
RESULTS
243 results were reviewed to obtain 11 recommendations. Ophthalmology sources included the American Academy of Ophthalmology, Royal College of Ophthalmologists and Canadian editorials. The American College of Rheumatology and Canadian Rheumatology Association consensus statements summarised rheumatology recommendations. Recently, American and British guidelines changed from suggesting hydroxychloroquine doses ≤6.5 mg/kg/day to ≤5 mg/kg/day. American guidelines recommended baseline visual field (VF) testing and annual screening after five years. Visual field (VF) testing evolved from the Amsler grid to current recommendations of 10-2 automated VF and spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT). The 2012 Canadian recommendations suggested initial VF testing every two years, with SD-OCT after 10 years. Older British guidelines advocated for baseline and annual assessment with Amsler grids during rheumatology clinic visits. The 2018 British guidelines supported baseline and annual screening after five years with 10-2 VF, SD-OCT and fundus autofluorescence.
CONCLUSIONS
The newest recommendations are heterogeneous suggesting lower hydroxychloroquine dosing. Retinal toxicity is irreversible and the risk increases over time. Annual screening after five years with automated VF and SD-OCT may be warranted to detect early changes and discontinue therapy if necessary.
Topics: Antimalarials; Antirheumatic Agents; Canada; Humans; Hydroxychloroquine; Retinal Diseases; Rheumatic Diseases; Tomography, Optical Coherence
PubMed: 33124575
DOI: 10.55563/clinexprheumatol/1u36qt -
Otolaryngology--head and Neck Surgery :... Apr 2022Odontogenic sinusitis (ODS) can cause infectious orbital, intracranial, and osseous complications. Diagnosis and management of complicated ODS have not been discussed in...
OBJECTIVE
Odontogenic sinusitis (ODS) can cause infectious orbital, intracranial, and osseous complications. Diagnosis and management of complicated ODS have not been discussed in recent sinusitis guidelines. The purpose of this systematic review was to describe epidemiological and clinical features, as well as management strategies of complicated ODS.
DATA SOURCES
PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library.
REVIEW METHODS
A systematic review was performed to describe various features of complicated ODS. All complicated ODS studies were included in qualitative analysis, but studies were only included in quantitative analysis if they reported specific patient-level data.
RESULTS
Of 1126 studies identified, 75 studies with 110 complicated ODS cases were included in qualitative analysis, and 47 studies with 62 orbital and intracranial complications were included in quantitative analyses. About 70% of complicated ODS cases were orbital complications. Only 23% of complicated ODS studies were published in otolaryngology journals. Regarding ODS-related orbital and intracranial complications, about 80% occurred in adults, and 75% were male. Complicated ODS occurred most commonly from apical periodontitis of maxillary molars. There were no relationships between sinusitis extent and orbital or intracranial complications. High rates of anaerobic and α-hemolytic streptococcal bacteria were identified in complicated ODS. Management generally included systemic antibiotics covering aerobic and anaerobic bacteria, and surgical interventions were generally performed to address both the complications (orbital and/or intracranial) and possible infectious sources (dentition and sinuses).
CONCLUSION
ODS should be considered in all patients with infectious extrasinus complications. Multidisciplinary management between otolaryngologists, dental specialists, ophthalmologists, and neurosurgeons should be considered to optimize outcomes.
Topics: Adult; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Humans; Male; Orbital Diseases; Otolaryngologists; Otolaryngology; Paranasal Sinuses; Sinusitis
PubMed: 34253072
DOI: 10.1177/01945998211026268