A multi‑country assessment of eyecare practitioner clinical experience and satisfaction with a custom scleral lens system
CLOSE
MENU

A multi‑country assessment of eyecare practitioner clinical experience and satisfaction with a custom scleral lens system


Content provided by Bausch + Lomb Medical Affairs.

A multi‑country assessment of eyecare practitioner clinical experience and satisfaction with a custom scleral lens system


Content provided by Bausch + Lomb Medical Affairs.

Summary

PURPOSE:

This retrospective multicentre case review documented real-world visual outcomes, lens fitting practices, and eyecare practitioner (ECP) satisfaction with Zenlens, a custom scleral lens (SL). Here, ECP satisfaction outcomes are presented.

METHODS:

SL-experienced ECPs from Canada, Ireland, and the USA used a standardised case report form (CRF) to provide a deidentified retrospective convenience sample of ≥5 cases, including ≥3 complex cases, with a range of customisations. ECPs reported their overall satisfaction with lens outcomes, and the degree, process, and ease of customisation. Central IRB exemption was received. Descriptive statistics are reported.

RESULTS:

Nine ECPs completed the ECP satisfaction section of the CRF. Mean±SE years of ECP SL experience was 14±2 years. The retrospective chart review included 45 patients (62 eyes). SLs were fitted in both eyes in 17 patients, OS in 13 patients, and OD in 15 patients. The most common diagnosis was keratoconus (42/62 eyes); other reasons for SL utilisation included high/irregular astigmatism and other corneal disease resulting in corneal irregularities. All ECPs rated satisfaction with lens outcomes, degree of lens customisation, and lens customisation process as either 8 (n=1/56 eyes; 2/56 eyes; 2/55 eyes, respectively), 9 (n=6/56 eyes; 5/56 eyes; 3/55 eyes, respectively), or 10 (n=49/56 eyes; 49/56 eyes; 50/55 eyes, respectively) [0, very dissatisfied; 10, very satisfied]. Fit, vision outcomes, and patient satisfaction were the most cited reasons for satisfaction. All ECPs rated the process of SL customisation as either 8 (n=5/56 eyes), 9 (n=9/56 eyes), or 10 (n=42/56 eyes) [0, very difficult; 10, very easy]. ECPs did not provide satisfaction ratings for all domains/patients/eyes, accounting for the variation in responses.

CONCLUSION:

This case review provided insights into the real-world utilisation of this customisable SL; it demonstrated high levels of ECP satisfaction with lens outcomes, degree of lens customisation, and the lens customisation process in patients with various corneal conditions.

For More Information:

Get Support

Contact Us

Contact a
Representative

Find My Local Rep link-out icon

Submit a
Medical Inquiry

Complete the Form