ArticleClinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)2025
Factors Affecting Ocular Prosthetic Use Amongst Anophthalmic Patients: A Retrospective Review with Patient Interviews.
Article in Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To evaluate the rate of ocular prosthesis use amongst anophthalmic patients following eye removal surgery and to investigate the influence of socioeconomic factors on prosthesis acquisition. Methods: A retrospective chart review was conducted for adults undergoing enucleation or evisceration by two surgeons at two urban trauma centers and a private practice between December 2013 and February 2024. Patients were identified using Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes for primary and secondary eye removal procedures. Demographic, clinical, and socioeconomic data were collected, including insurance status, employment at the time of surgery, and estimated household income by zip code. Chart data was supplemented by patient telephone interviews which assessed current prosthesis use and barriers to acquisition. Statistical analyses included chi-squared, Fisher's exact, t-tests, and multivariate logistic regression to identify factors associated with prosthesis use. Results: Among 152 patients screened, 138 patients were included (mean age 52; 55.8% male; 60.1% Black), and 81 (59%) obtained a prosthesis by last follow-up. Most patients (82%) had government-sponsored insurance. Employment and longer follow-up duration were significantly associated with prosthesis use (p=0.036; p<0.001). In multivariate analysis, female sex (adjusted OR=2.06, [1.0; 4.27], P=0.052) and private insurance (adjusted OR=2.70, [0.84; 8.7], P=0.097) trended toward higher rates of prosthesis utilization but were not statistically significant. Among 41/138 (30%) interview participants, 30/41 (73%) had a prosthesis, with 26 of these 30 (87%) reporting positive impacts on quality-of-life. Cost was the most cited barrier among those without a prosthesis. Conclusion: This study uniquely combines clinical data with direct patient interviews to provide new evidence on real-world barriers to prosthesis access among anophthalmic patients. Ocular prosthesis utilization remains limited, with fewer than 60% of anophthalmic patients obtaining prostheses despite high insurance coverage rates. Employment status and consistent follow-up care were significantly associated with prosthesis acquisition, while cost appeared as a primary barrier. Future efforts should leverage emerging technologies and integrated care pathways to improve access for all anophthalmic patients.
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.