Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37574470›Full record

ArticleInternational ophthalmology2023

Management of external ocular prosthesis by ocularists: results of an online survey conducted in Brazil and Spain.

Elvira Martinez-Fernandez, Carolina Pereira Bigheti, Hortensia Sanchez-Tocino, Denise Moreira Zornoff, Silvana Artioli Schellini, Alicia Galindo-Ferreiro

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International ophthalmology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Elvira Martinez-FernandezDepartment of Ophthalmology-Oculoplastic, Rio Hortega University Hospital, Valladolid, Spain.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7558-2410
Carolina Pereira BighetiBotucatu Medical School, Universidade Estadual Paulista Júlio de Mesquita Filho, São Paulo State University (UNESP), Botucatu, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8817-2656
Hortensia Sanchez-TocinoDepartment of Ophthalmology-Oculoplastic, Rio Hortega University Hospital, Valladolid, Spain.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2695-7794
Denise Moreira ZornoffBotucatu Medical School, Universidade Estadual Paulista Júlio de Mesquita Filho, São Paulo State University (UNESP), Botucatu, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9905-7327
Silvana Artioli SchelliniBotucatu Medical School, Universidade Estadual Paulista Júlio de Mesquita Filho, São Paulo State University (UNESP), Botucatu, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6938-1230
Alicia Galindo-FerreiroDepartment of Ophthalmology-Oculoplastic, Rio Hortega University Hospital, Valladolid, Spain. ali_galindo@yahoo.es.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8854-9625

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo analyse the ocularist's perspective on the management of the anophthalmic socket and external ocular prosthesis (EOP).

methodsOcularists from two countries were invited to participate in an online questionnaire. Data were collected on demographics, anophthalmic socket and EOP management (manufacturing, use, cleaning), complications, follow-up visits and multidisciplinary care. The frequency and proportions of the responses were statistically analysed.

resultsThe questionnaire was addressed to 20 Brazilian and 17 Spanish ocularists, obtaining a response rate of 65% and 64.7%, respectively. 62.5% of respondents were men. The most common cause of anophthalmia in Brazil (69.2%) and Spain (36.4%) is an eye disease (chi square: p = 0.188). Polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) is the most commonly used material in EOP manufacture (chi square: p = 0.448), and 70.8% reported using customized EOPs (chi square: p = 0.069). Deposits are frequently observed in both countries (chi square: p = 0.157). Changing the prosthesis is recommended after 5 to 10 years by Brazilian ocularists, and after less than 5 years of use by Spanish ocularists (81.8%) (chi square: p = 0.041). Annual follow-up is recommended by Spanish ocularists (45.5%), while semestral (38.5%) and case-dependent (38.5%) follow-up is recommended by Brazilian ocularists (chi square: p = 0.267). Daily cleaning is advocated by 61.5% of Brazilian ocularists and once a month by 45.5% of Spanish ocularists (chi square: p = 0.098), with 75% of ocularists from both countries not recommending EOP removal at night (Fisher´s exact test: p = 0.166). Good communication between ocularists and ophthalmologists was reported by 87.5% of our responders (chi square: p = 0.642).

conclusionAlthough there are no unified protocols on the management of EOPs, Brazilian and Spanish ocularists follow similar guidelines. Differences between countries were the patients´ referral and the prosthesis´ useful life.

Indexed as

AnophthalmosEye, ArtificialBrazilFemaleHumansMaleProsthesis ImplantationSpainSurveys and QuestionnairesAnophthalmiaAnophthalmic socketOcularistOcular prosthesisSurvey

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.