May 2008
Volume 49, Issue 13
Free
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   May 2008
Focus Group Evaluation of Occlusion Dose Monitoring for Amblyopia Occlusion Therapy
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • M. J. Moseley
    Optometry and Visual Science, City University, London, United Kingdom
  • C. E. Stewart
    Optometry and Visual Science, City University, London, United Kingdom
  • A. R. Fielder
    Optometry and Visual Science, City University, London, United Kingdom
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships  M.J. Moseley, None; C.E. Stewart, None; A.R. Fielder, None.
  • Footnotes
    Support  The Emerald Fund
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science May 2008, Vol.49, 2586. doi:https://doi.org/
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      M. J. Moseley, C. E. Stewart, A. R. Fielder; Focus Group Evaluation of Occlusion Dose Monitoring for Amblyopia Occlusion Therapy. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2008;49(13):2586. doi: https://doi.org/.

      Download citation file:


      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Purpose: : To assess the possible role, and potential feature set of occlusion dose monitors (ODMs) in routine clinical practice. To date, ODMs have been exclusively used as a research tool (see, e.g. Stewart et al., BMJ 2007;335:707, Loudon et al., Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2006;47:4393-400). We sought the views of relevant stake-holders pursuant to our aim.

Methods: : Focus group methodology to elicit opinions from three groups of individuals: parents of children who were familiar with the use of a prototype ODM having previously participated in a clinical trial of amblyopia treatment (PF); parents who were unfamiliar with ODM use but whose children had recently undergone occlusion therapy (PUF); senior orthoptists who had no previous experience of ODM use (SO). The group discussions were facilitated by an independent market researcher and lasted approximately 2 hours. The facilitator opened each session by initiating a general discussion on amblyopia therapy before eliciting opinions on the principles and practice of occlusion dose monitoring.

Results: : PF (n=4): Expressed reservations over use of wireless technology; requested the incorporation of several design features: audible prompts, games and video technology, ability to transfer data to family PC or web page. PUF (n=15): Expressed reservations over use of wireless technology and of monitoring occlusion in principle; a 'data display' (of patching dose achieved) was thought to be a potential aid to compliance. SO (n=10): Considered ODMs might usefully be employed in clinical practice; incorporation of an ODM into a watch or mp3 player thought beneficial and use of wireless technology (no leads connecting patch to logging unit) essential; the importance of size, customization for gender, adaptability for spectacle occlusion were also raised.

Conclusions: : The focus groups yielded a plethora of relevant opinions. For the most part these related to ergonomic and design features of ODM construction whose practicality can now be evaluated. A strong divergence of opinion existed among parents and orthoptists regarding the adoption of wireless technologies.

Keywords: amblyopia • clinical (human) or epidemiologic studies: systems/equipment/techniques • clinical research methodology 
×
×

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.

×