May 2008
Volume 49, Issue 13
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   May 2008
Treatment of Glaucoma Patients With Insufficient Intraocular Pressure Control: A Survey of German Ophthalmologists in Private Practice
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • C. K. Vorwerk
    Dept of Ophthalmology, Otto von Guericke University, Magdeburg, Germany
  • U. Thelen
    Private Practice, Munster, Germany
  • F. Kimmich
    Eyecons, Pfinztal, Germany
  • P. Buchholz
    Allergan Europe, Ettlingen, Germany
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships  C.K. Vorwerk, None; U. Thelen, None; F. Kimmich, None; P. Buchholz, Allergan, Inc, E.
  • Footnotes
    Support  None.
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science May 2008, Vol.49, 5446. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      C. K. Vorwerk, U. Thelen, F. Kimmich, P. Buchholz; Treatment of Glaucoma Patients With Insufficient Intraocular Pressure Control: A Survey of German Ophthalmologists in Private Practice. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2008;49(13):5446.

      Download citation file:

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

  • Supplements

Purpose: : Medical management of intraocular pressure (IOP) is the primary treatment strategy for glaucoma, but is of limited success for many patients. We conducted a survey of difficult-to-treat patients with ocular hypertension (OH) and glaucoma in Germany. A standardized questionnaire was used to evaluate if the new findings from different epidemiological studies (AGIS, OHTS, EMGT, etc.) related to diagnosis, therapy and follow-up of patients with OH, primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG) and other types of glaucoma are already established in glaucoma practice.

Methods: : A questionnaire was given to ophthalmologists in private practice in Germany and data including treatment difficulty, target IOP, number and type of medications used, 2 most recent IOP readings, and optic nerve head and visual field observations were collected from patients who exhibited unsatisfactory progress with IOP-lowering pharmacotherapy.

Results: : Of the 853 patients analyzed, POAG was the diagnosis for 67.1%. Target IOP levels had been determined for 95.5% of patients, and not achieving the target pressure was identified as a treatment difficulty for 81.0% of patients. Of patients on monotherapy, β-blockers were prescribed most often (42.3%). For all diagnoses, 53.3% of patients were treated with 2 or more agents as either fixed or non-fixed combinations. The non-fixed combination of a prostaglandin and CAI was the most frequently prescribed dual therapy (19.2%). Mean actual (treated) IOP for all patients was 20.3 ± 4.3 mmHg, mean target IOP was 16.6 ± 2.3mmHg. Actual (treated) IOP values followed a normal distribution (maximum: 20 mmHg). The most frequent target IOP value chosen by the participants of the survey was 18 mmHg (358 eyes). Disease severity was influencing the choice of target IOP: mean target IOP for patients with OH (n = 110) was 18.5 ± 2.0 mmHg whereas the mean target IOP for patients with glaucomatous optic nerve head and visual field damage (n = 437) was 16.4 ± 2.4 mmHg. Non-compliance was identified as a cause of unsatisfactory IOP-lowering in 26.8% of all patients.

Conclusions: : Treatment alterations are necessary to achieve sufficient IOP control in some patients, and more aggressive therapies including fixed-combination preparations may improve efficacy and compliance.

Keywords: clinical (human) or epidemiologic studies: outcomes/complications 

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.