ArticleBMJ open ophthalmology2025
Patients' perspectives of ophthalmic management of facial nerve paralysis.
Article in BMJ open ophthalmology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Standardizing Periocular Surface Electromyography: A Scoping Review of Methods and Emerging Applications.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Efficacy of intradermal acupuncture for ocular surface diseases secondary to refractory peripheral facial palsy: a randomized controlled trial study protocol.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Eyelid Malpositions and Ocular Surface Disease: Clinical Correlations and Management Strategies.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveFacial nerve paralysis (FNP) affects eye muscle function causing lagophthalmos. This leaves the cornea vulnerable to irritation and injury which, if untreated, may cause permanent vision impairment. Decreased eye muscle control impacts facial expressions and quality of life. Although non-surgical interventions such as lubrication are routinely used in standard eyecare, patient perspectives regarding these interventions have not been extensively investigated. This study aims to investigate patients' perspectives of conservative ophthalmic management for FNP. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Participants with FNP completed a survey including seven conservative lagophthalmos management interventions: artificial tears, lubricating ointment, taping the eye shut, tape to lift the lower eyelid, scleral contact lens, moisture chamber and manual eye closure. Open-ended questions and Likert scales covered six domains: discomfort, appearance-related concerns, application difficulties, impact on activities of daily living and social activities, and tolerance to outdoor settings. Descriptive, bivariate, correlation and thematic analyses were undertaken.
results49 participants completed the survey (17 males, 32 females; mean age 55 years, SD 14.94). Mean duration of FNP was 8 years, 5 months (range 12 months to 47 years). Artificial tears and lubricating ointments were most frequently used with highest overall satisfaction. Participants were less satisfied with interventions involving the use of tape. Manual eye closure had a small positive impact. Main themes were comfort, vision and appearance.
conclusionsFunctional, social and psychological impairments associated with lagophthalmos are managed using conservative interventions. A better understanding of a patient's capacity, priorities and preferences underpins a collaborative approach when selecting eye-protective interventions and optimises patient outcomes.The main limitation of this study was that participants were recruited from a specialty facial nerve clinic, resulting in an over-representation of individuals with long-standing, complex conditions.
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.