| Title |
Success of patient training in improving proficiency of eyedrop administration among various ophthalmic patient populations
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Ophthalmology, August 2016
|
| DOI | 10.2147/opth.s108979 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Alexander Feng, John O’Neill, Mitchell Holt, Catherine Georgiadis, Martha M Wright, Sandra R Montezuma |
| Abstract |
The purpose of this study is to evaluate the success and usefulness of patient education in eyedrop self-administration technique via an educational handout and a short instructional video. We conducted a prospective study that included 34 patients who were self-administering ophthalmic drops. Of the total patients included, 12% had used drops for <12 months, and 88% had used drops for >12 months. Average age of patients in the study was 67 years, with an age range of 19-91 years. Of the total patients included, 82% had glaucoma, 6% had dry eyes, and 12% did not have a specific diagnosis. Subjects were video recorded and assessed by a trained observer on two occasions: at baseline and after they viewed a demonstrational video and handout. A maximum score of 15 points was awarded based on 15 criteria. A written self-assessment was administered at the end of each study. Pre- and post-teaching assessment scores improved significantly with education. Patients initially scored an average 2.53 points compared to a post-education score of 6.15 out of 15 points, demonstrating a 2.43 (P=0.008) factor of improvement. After education, 94% of patients versus 47% pre-teaching (P=0.0001) pulled down their lower eyelids. A total of 91% pre-teaching versus 59% post-teaching (P=0.0042) patients squeezed one drop into the lower fornix, 74% pre-teaching versus 26% post-teaching (P=0.0002) patients released the eyelid and closed the eye for 1 minute, and 56% pre-teaching versus 3% post-teaching (P=0.0001) patients applied nasal digital pressure on each eye. We found no significant difference in score changes between those who previously received education and those who had not (P=0.37). A total of 91% patients responded in a postassessment survey that they now feel more confident of their ability to self-administer eyedrops as their doctor prescribed and that the educational materials were responsible. Participants demonstrated an immediate and statistically significant improvement in several areas of proper eyedrop self-administration after exposure to a demonstration video and instructional handout. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 56 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 56 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 12 | 21% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 5% |
| Lecturer | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 7 | 13% |
| Unknown | 22 | 39% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 19 | 34% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 5% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 4% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 4% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 4 | 7% |
| Unknown | 24 | 43% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 11 August 2016.
All research outputs
#20,653,708
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Ophthalmology
#2,605
of 3,712 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#299,484
of 381,020 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Ophthalmology
#53
of 86 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,712 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 381,020 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 86 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.