Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2017 Jan/Feb;33(1):61-64.
doi: 10.1097/IOP.0000000000000652.

Compliance With Protective Lens Wear in Anophthalmic Patients

Affiliations

Compliance With Protective Lens Wear in Anophthalmic Patients

Michael G Neimkin et al. Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg. 2017 Jan/Feb.

Abstract

Purpose: To evaluate the frequency of protective lens wear by anophthalmic patients and identify factors that influence compliance.

Methods: An IRB approved descriptive retrospective chart review of patients undergoing surgery with the senior author (PLC) with an anophthalmic orbit and one remaining sighted eye. Results were tabulated and analyzed using age, indication for procedure, duration of visual symptoms, safety glasses wear, number of postoperative visits, and evidence of new trauma to the remaining eye. All patients underwent counseling on the importance of protective lens wear preoperatively and each subsequent visit.

Results: Etiologies for loss of the eye in the 132 study patients included trauma (33.3%), blind painful eye (33.3%), congenital disorders (14.4%), adult-onset malignancy (14.4%), and retinoblastoma (4.5%). At the final visit, protective lenses were worn in the following patterns: full-time (55.3%), frequently (11.4%), occasional (6%), and never (28.8%). The regular use of protective eyewear at last visit was more common in patients wearing glasses at presentation (79.7%), than in those who did not (32.9%; p ≤ 0.001). Increased number of office encounters correlated with more frequent use of protective eyewear (p ≤ 0.01). Patient age (p = 0.95), indication for surgery (p = 0.97), and duration of visual loss (p = 0.85) were not predictive of safety glasses wear. Three patients had evidence of subsequent ocular trauma to the remaining eye, with 2 having resultant decrease in acuity; none of these 3 patients wore safety glasses full-time.

Conclusions: A significant number of anopthalmic patients were not wearing protective lenses at presentation. Overall compliance was poor; but repeated education on the importance of safety glasses appears to improve compliance. Educating referring providers and primary care physicians about the importance of early and repeated counseling is vital to increasing compliance.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Guly CM, Guly HR, Bouamra O, et al. Ocular injuries in patients with major trauma. Emergency Medicine Journal : EMJ. 2006;23(12):915–917. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Negrel AD, Thylefors B. The global impact of eye injuries. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 1998;5(3):143–169. - PubMed
    1. http://development.aao.org/eyecare/treatment/eye-safety.cfm. Retrieved on April 25, 2015.

    1. Nys J, Scheyltjens I, Arckens L. Visual system plasticity in mammals: the story of monocular enucleation-induced vision loss. Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience. 2015;9 - PMC - PubMed
    1. Kondo T, Tillman WT, Schwartz TL, et al. Health-related quality of life after surgical removal of an eye. Ophthal Plast Reconstr Surg. 2013;29(1):51–56. - PMC - PubMed