Current trends of myopia management strategies in clinical practice

Research output: Contribution to conferenceAbstract

Abstract

Purpose : Myopia is a global public health issue, however, no information exists as to how research findings on retardation strategies are being adopted in clinical practice.Methods : A self-administrated, internet-based questionnaire (SurveyMonkey, USA) was distributed, in 6 languages, through professional bodies to eye care practitioners globally. The questionnaire consisted of 9 questions regarding their awareness of the increasing prevalence of myopia and the implications of this; their perception of the relative efficacy of the available myopia management strategies; their prescribing frequency of each type of correction; the annual progression rate of myopia they believe requires management; their preferred management strategies dependence on patient’s age and refractive error; and their rationale for prescribing single vision spectacles as primary method of management.Results : Nine hundred and seventy-one responses were received from Africa (n = 6), Asia (n = 291), Australasia (n = 119), Europe (n = 339), North America (n = 133), and South America (n = 82) respectively. Where possible (n ≥ 30), a sub-analysis of individual countries was conducted. Concern was higher (median 9/10) in Asia than any other continent (7/10, p < 0.001), and Asia considered itself more active in implementing myopia control strategies (8/10, p < 0.001) than Australasia, Europe (7/10), North America (4/10) or South America (5/10). Orthokeratology was perceived to be the most effective method of myopia control, followed by increased time spent outdoors and pharmaceutical approaches, while under-correction and single vision spectacles were perceived to be least effective (p < 0.05). Although intra-regional differences existed, 63.0 (±37.8)% of practitioners prescribed single vision spectacles or contact lenses as the primary type of correction for myopic patients globally. The main justifications for their reluctance to prescribe anything other than single vision were increased cost (35.6%), inadequate information (33.3%), and the unpredictability of the outcome (28.2%).Conclusions : Regardless of the practitioners’ awareness of the relative efficacy of various methods available, the vast majority still prescribe single vision interventions to young myopes. In view of the increasing prevalence of myopia and the existing evidence for interventions to slow myopia progression, clear guidelines for myopia control needs to be established.

LanguageEnglish
Pages2487
Number of pages1
Publication statusPublished - 1 May 2016
Eventarvo 2016 : Annual meeting - Seattle, Washington, United States
Duration: 1 May 20165 May 2016

Conference

Conferencearvo 2016
CountryUnited States
CityWashington
Period1/05/165/05/16

Fingerprint

Myopia
Australasia
South America
North America
Refractive Errors
Contact Lenses
Internet
Language
Public Health
Guidelines
Costs and Cost Analysis

Bibliographical note

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Cite this

Zvirgzdina, M., Orr, J. B., Logan, N. S., & Wolffsohn, J. S. (2016). Current trends of myopia management strategies in clinical practice. 2487. Abstract from arvo 2016 , Washington, United States.
@conference{3f81edeaf287434aa96e2ae81f14203e,
title = "Current trends of myopia management strategies in clinical practice",
abstract = "Purpose : Myopia is a global public health issue, however, no information exists as to how research findings on retardation strategies are being adopted in clinical practice.Methods : A self-administrated, internet-based questionnaire (SurveyMonkey, USA) was distributed, in 6 languages, through professional bodies to eye care practitioners globally. The questionnaire consisted of 9 questions regarding their awareness of the increasing prevalence of myopia and the implications of this; their perception of the relative efficacy of the available myopia management strategies; their prescribing frequency of each type of correction; the annual progression rate of myopia they believe requires management; their preferred management strategies dependence on patient’s age and refractive error; and their rationale for prescribing single vision spectacles as primary method of management.Results : Nine hundred and seventy-one responses were received from Africa (n = 6), Asia (n = 291), Australasia (n = 119), Europe (n = 339), North America (n = 133), and South America (n = 82) respectively. Where possible (n ≥ 30), a sub-analysis of individual countries was conducted. Concern was higher (median 9/10) in Asia than any other continent (7/10, p < 0.001), and Asia considered itself more active in implementing myopia control strategies (8/10, p < 0.001) than Australasia, Europe (7/10), North America (4/10) or South America (5/10). Orthokeratology was perceived to be the most effective method of myopia control, followed by increased time spent outdoors and pharmaceutical approaches, while under-correction and single vision spectacles were perceived to be least effective (p < 0.05). Although intra-regional differences existed, 63.0 (±37.8){\%} of practitioners prescribed single vision spectacles or contact lenses as the primary type of correction for myopic patients globally. The main justifications for their reluctance to prescribe anything other than single vision were increased cost (35.6{\%}), inadequate information (33.3{\%}), and the unpredictability of the outcome (28.2{\%}).Conclusions : Regardless of the practitioners’ awareness of the relative efficacy of various methods available, the vast majority still prescribe single vision interventions to young myopes. In view of the increasing prevalence of myopia and the existing evidence for interventions to slow myopia progression, clear guidelines for myopia control needs to be established.",
author = "Madara Zvirgzdina and Orr, {Janis B} and Logan, {Nicola S} and Wolffsohn, {James S.}",
note = "This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.; arvo 2016 : Annual meeting ; Conference date: 01-05-2016 Through 05-05-2016",
year = "2016",
month = "5",
day = "1",
language = "English",
pages = "2487",

}

Zvirgzdina, M, Orr, JB, Logan, NS & Wolffsohn, JS 2016, 'Current trends of myopia management strategies in clinical practice' arvo 2016 , Washington, United States, 1/05/16 - 5/05/16, pp. 2487.

Current trends of myopia management strategies in clinical practice. / Zvirgzdina, Madara; Orr, Janis B; Logan, Nicola S; Wolffsohn, James S.

2016. 2487 Abstract from arvo 2016 , Washington, United States.

Research output: Contribution to conferenceAbstract

TY - CONF

T1 - Current trends of myopia management strategies in clinical practice

AU - Zvirgzdina, Madara

AU - Orr, Janis B

AU - Logan, Nicola S

AU - Wolffsohn, James S.

N1 - This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

PY - 2016/5/1

Y1 - 2016/5/1

N2 - Purpose : Myopia is a global public health issue, however, no information exists as to how research findings on retardation strategies are being adopted in clinical practice.Methods : A self-administrated, internet-based questionnaire (SurveyMonkey, USA) was distributed, in 6 languages, through professional bodies to eye care practitioners globally. The questionnaire consisted of 9 questions regarding their awareness of the increasing prevalence of myopia and the implications of this; their perception of the relative efficacy of the available myopia management strategies; their prescribing frequency of each type of correction; the annual progression rate of myopia they believe requires management; their preferred management strategies dependence on patient’s age and refractive error; and their rationale for prescribing single vision spectacles as primary method of management.Results : Nine hundred and seventy-one responses were received from Africa (n = 6), Asia (n = 291), Australasia (n = 119), Europe (n = 339), North America (n = 133), and South America (n = 82) respectively. Where possible (n ≥ 30), a sub-analysis of individual countries was conducted. Concern was higher (median 9/10) in Asia than any other continent (7/10, p < 0.001), and Asia considered itself more active in implementing myopia control strategies (8/10, p < 0.001) than Australasia, Europe (7/10), North America (4/10) or South America (5/10). Orthokeratology was perceived to be the most effective method of myopia control, followed by increased time spent outdoors and pharmaceutical approaches, while under-correction and single vision spectacles were perceived to be least effective (p < 0.05). Although intra-regional differences existed, 63.0 (±37.8)% of practitioners prescribed single vision spectacles or contact lenses as the primary type of correction for myopic patients globally. The main justifications for their reluctance to prescribe anything other than single vision were increased cost (35.6%), inadequate information (33.3%), and the unpredictability of the outcome (28.2%).Conclusions : Regardless of the practitioners’ awareness of the relative efficacy of various methods available, the vast majority still prescribe single vision interventions to young myopes. In view of the increasing prevalence of myopia and the existing evidence for interventions to slow myopia progression, clear guidelines for myopia control needs to be established.

AB - Purpose : Myopia is a global public health issue, however, no information exists as to how research findings on retardation strategies are being adopted in clinical practice.Methods : A self-administrated, internet-based questionnaire (SurveyMonkey, USA) was distributed, in 6 languages, through professional bodies to eye care practitioners globally. The questionnaire consisted of 9 questions regarding their awareness of the increasing prevalence of myopia and the implications of this; their perception of the relative efficacy of the available myopia management strategies; their prescribing frequency of each type of correction; the annual progression rate of myopia they believe requires management; their preferred management strategies dependence on patient’s age and refractive error; and their rationale for prescribing single vision spectacles as primary method of management.Results : Nine hundred and seventy-one responses were received from Africa (n = 6), Asia (n = 291), Australasia (n = 119), Europe (n = 339), North America (n = 133), and South America (n = 82) respectively. Where possible (n ≥ 30), a sub-analysis of individual countries was conducted. Concern was higher (median 9/10) in Asia than any other continent (7/10, p < 0.001), and Asia considered itself more active in implementing myopia control strategies (8/10, p < 0.001) than Australasia, Europe (7/10), North America (4/10) or South America (5/10). Orthokeratology was perceived to be the most effective method of myopia control, followed by increased time spent outdoors and pharmaceutical approaches, while under-correction and single vision spectacles were perceived to be least effective (p < 0.05). Although intra-regional differences existed, 63.0 (±37.8)% of practitioners prescribed single vision spectacles or contact lenses as the primary type of correction for myopic patients globally. The main justifications for their reluctance to prescribe anything other than single vision were increased cost (35.6%), inadequate information (33.3%), and the unpredictability of the outcome (28.2%).Conclusions : Regardless of the practitioners’ awareness of the relative efficacy of various methods available, the vast majority still prescribe single vision interventions to young myopes. In view of the increasing prevalence of myopia and the existing evidence for interventions to slow myopia progression, clear guidelines for myopia control needs to be established.

UR - http://iovs.arvojournals.org/article.aspx?articleid=2560923&resultClick=1

M3 - Abstract

SP - 2487

ER -

Zvirgzdina M, Orr JB, Logan NS, Wolffsohn JS. Current trends of myopia management strategies in clinical practice. 2016. Abstract from arvo 2016 , Washington, United States.