ArticleOphthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists)2026
Infection Control in Optometric Practice: Evaluating the Impact of Guidelines on Knowledge, Attitude and Practice Behaviours.
Article in Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeInfection control (IC) is central to safe optometric care, yet little is known about optometrists' knowledge, attitudes and practice behaviours (KAP) in this domain. This study aimed to assess the IC-related KAP of Australian optometrists and to evaluate whether engagement with newly released IC guidelines could improve these measures.
methodsThis study comprised two components: a cross-sectional survey of Australian optometrists' IC-related KAP (part A) and a pre-post intervention study assessing the impact of IC guidelines (part B). The survey, distributed in early 2021, included demographic items, KAP measures and explored perceived barriers to best practice and preferred educational resources. Knowledge was assessed using multiple-choice and true/false questions, while attitudes and behaviours were analysed using Rasch-scaled measures. Participants consenting to follow-up were randomised into control or intervention groups. The intervention group received updated IC guidelines before repeating the survey; the control group repeated the survey prior to guideline exposure.
resultsA total of 302 valid responses were analysed in part A. Respondents demonstrated moderate knowledge (mean 58%), supportive attitudes (median 79/100) and reported enacting IC behaviours in practice (median 64/100), although notable gaps were identified in areas such as tonometer disinfection and infectious disease exclusion periods. Barriers included insufficient time (47%), workplace support (29%) and equipment access (28%). Trusted sources of IC information were Optometry Australia, government advice and clinical guidelines. In part B (n = 73), the intervention group demonstrated significant improvements in knowledge (p < 0.01) and attitude (p = 0.02) compared with controls, although the attitude change was not clinically meaningful. No significant changes were observed in self-reported behaviours.
conclusionsEngagement with IC guidelines significantly improved knowledge among Australian optometrists but did not translate into behaviour change. Findings highlight the need for multifaceted, theory-informed implementation strategies that address environmental and motivational barriers, alongside provision of trusted resources, to embed evidence-based IC practices in optometry.
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.