evaluation of the efficacy, safety, and acceptability of an eyelid warming device for the treatment of meibomian gland dysfunction

Clicks: 133
ID: 158615
2014
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Steady

Ranked #204 of 271 articles by views in e3s web of conferences

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 271 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
José Manuel Benitez del Castillo,1 Thomas Kaercher,2 Khaled Mansour,3 Edward Wylegala,4 Harminder Dua5 1Universidad Complutense, Madrid, Spain; 2Augenarztpraxis, Heidelberg, Germany; 3Department of Ophthalmology, Tjongerschans Hospital, Heerenveen, the Netherlands; 4Department of Ophthalmology, Medical University of Silesia, District Railway Hospital, Katowice, Poland; 5Division of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, Eye ENT Centre, Queens Medical Centre, Nottingham, UKAbstract: Meibomian gland dysfunction (MGD) is widespread and has significant impact on patients’ quality of life. Eyelid hygiene is the mainstay of treatment but is unstandardized and requires commitment from the patient and encouragement from the ophthalmologist. Blephasteam® is an eyelid warming device designed to be an easy-to-use and standardized treatment for MGD. In the present study, 73 patients were treated for 21 days with twice daily Blephasteam® sessions. The primary efficacy variable, a symptomatology visual analog scale score, declined from 63.07±21.23 (mean ± standard deviation) on day 0 to 41.90±25.49 on day 21. There were also improvements in a number of secondary efficacy variables including subjective ocular symptoms and clinical signs and symptoms of MGD and dry eye, though tear film breakup time and tear osmolarity were not improved. Global efficacy was assessed as satisfactory or very satisfactory in 83.8% of cases. Patient-reported subjective ocular symptoms declined during the study, and a majority of patients rated the efficacy of Blephasteam® as satisfactory or very satisfactory. Most patients found the device comfortable and were able to continue with normal activities (reading, watching TV, using a computer) during the Blephasteam® session. No safety or tolerability issues were identified.Keywords: dry eye, Blephasteam®
Reference Key
jm2014clinicalevaluation Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors ;Benitez del Castillo JM;Kaercher T;Mansour K;Wylegala E;Dua H
Journal e3s web of conferences
Year 2014
DOI
DOI not found
URL
http://www.dovepress.com/evaluation-of-the-efficacy-safety-and-acceptability-of-an-eyelid-warmi-peer-reviewed-article-OPTH
Keywords
ophthalmology

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.