A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

What are the causes of non-tolerance to new spectacles and how can they be avoided? | LitMetric

What are the causes of non-tolerance to new spectacles and how can they be avoided?

Ophthalmic Physiol Opt

Bradford School of Optometry and Vision Science, University of Bradford, Bradford, UK.

Published: May 2022

Purpose: To investigate non-tolerance cases from several UK practices to determine their likely causes and how they might have been avoided.

Methods: Patient complaint and refraction data were collected from non-tolerance recheck examinations. For one practice, clinical data were also collected retrospectively to investigate the quality of the eye examinations.

Results: Data for 279 rechecks were gathered from 10 practices and a recheck frequency of 2.3% was found. The mean patient age was 60 (SD 16) years, with cylinder changes responsible for 38% of prescription-related causes of rechecks, overplusing or underminusing 26%, and underplusing or overminusing just 11%. An assessment of 242 recheck corrections found that 40% were unsatisfactory (e.g., failed to address initial or recheck symptoms, N = 45) and retrospective analysis of 217 case records showed many limitations (e.g., 61% or 28% recorded no uncorrected or habitual visual acuity (VA) at either initial examination or recheck).

Conclusions: Given that overplus-underminus was a much bigger proportion of prescription-related cases than overminus-underplus (26% vs. 11%), the refraction mantra of "maximum plus for maximum VA" should be balanced by increased teaching of the problems of overplusing and underminusing, and the use of prescribing guidelines. In addition, continuing professional development regarding the basics of the recheck examination, refraction, visual acuity and prism determination is needed. Changes of oblique cylinders should be carefully considered in older patients as this is a common cause of non-tolerance. In addition, if the "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" and related maxims had been applied to all patients who were asymptomatic at the original examination, one third of all non-tolerance cases could have been avoided. Finally, it would seem appropriate for practices to develop a system to deal better with non-tolerance cases. Perhaps an experienced clinician should examine all patients with non-tolerance and provide feedback to the original clinician.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9303957PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/opo.12961DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

non-tolerance cases
12
data collected
8
overplusing underminusing
8
visual acuity
8
non-tolerance
7
recheck
5
non-tolerance spectacles
4
spectacles avoided?
4
avoided? purpose
4
purpose investigate
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!