Trial reportIndian journal of ophthalmology2020
Eyelid retraction discomfort with cotton-tipped applicator, unimanual and speculum intravitreal injection techniques: Eyelid retraction technique randomized comparison trial (Eyelid RETRACT).
Trial report in Indian journal of ophthalmology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of intravitreal injection techniques with and without a speculum using eyelid retraction with a cotton-tipped applicator.International journal of retina and vitreous · 2025Article
- Greener intravitreal injections: a narrative review.Eye (London, England) · 2024Review
- Preventive factors, diagnosis, and management of injection-related endophthalmitis: a literature review.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2022Review
- Unimanual upper and lower eyelid retraction for intravitreal injections.Indian journal of ophthalmology · 2021Article
- Use of Simultaneous Bilateral Cataract Surgery (SBCS) to Optimize Parameters Affecting the Subjective Perception of the Procedure.Journal of ophthalmology · 2021Article
- Evaluation of pain scores during intravitreal injection in systemic conditions and in conjunction with medications.Therapeutic advances in ophthalmologyArticle
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
12 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: The aim of this study was to test the discomfort experienced during intravitreal injections with eyelid retraction between an eyelid speculum, cotton-tipped applicator (CTA), and unimanual eyelid retraction techniques. Methods: In total, 99 patients receiving intravitreal bevacizumab were enrolled into this prospective study. Participants were randomized to one of the three methods, given subconjunctival 2% lidocaine and then injected in the superior temporal quadrant. Immediately after the procedure, each patient was given a visual analog scale (VAS) to rate their discomfort. Results: The mean pain scores for eyelid retraction with unimanual, CTA, and speculum groups were 0.788 (standard deviation [SD] 0.70, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.448-1.128), 0.945 (SD 1.28, 95% CI 0.600-1.291), and 1.561 (SD 1.28, 95% CI 1.210-1.912), respectively. A one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) test revealed a significant difference between the groups (P = 0.006). Post hoc analysis also revealed a difference in mean pain scores between the speculum and both the CTA and the unimanual methods. Conclusion: Our study shows that the unimanual and CTA methods for eyelid retraction are significantly less painful for patients compared to the speculum method. Patient comfort is of the utmost importance as intravitreal injections are performed millions of times a year with most patients requiring multiple injections.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.