Purchase this article with an account.
James S. Wolffsohn, Jennifer P Craig, Lyndon William Jones, Sonia Trave-Huarte, Michael TM Wang; Global approaches to dry eye diagnosis. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2020;61(7):117.
Download citation file:
© ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)
Dry eye is a chronic and often debilitating disease, but understanding the prevalence and the effectiveness of management is hampered by differences in diagnosis and subclassification. This cross-sectional survey of eye care practitioners across the world aimed to identify the current approaches to dry eye diagnosis.
A Survey Monkey questionnaire was developed in consultation with dry eye specialists. Questions sought to determine the tests practitioners consider essential in the diagnosis of dry eye. Which aid the diagnosis? Which aid the subclassification into evaporative or aqueous deficient dry eye? Descriptive statistics were applied.
1,139 responses were received from 51 countries, 38% from ophthalmologists and 58% from optometrists, with a median of 11-15years of experience. The main tests reported as critical for a diagnosis of dry eye were verbal symptoms (69%), fluorescein breakup time (67%) and corneal staining (64%). In addition, reports of visual disturbance (57%), symptomology results from a validated questionnaire (48%), ocular redness (54%) and blink/lid closure analysis (54%) were commonly used to aid diagnosis. A median of 7 tests were deemed essential to diagnose dry eye (range 0-28). Tests that proved popular for differentiating dry eye subtypes were Schirmer/Phenol red thread test (32%), meibomian gland expression (32%) and orifice examination (32%) and blink/lid closure analysis (32%); use of verbal (38%) and questionnaire (30%) symptomatology, fluorescein breakup time (39%) and corneal staining (37%), for this purpose, were also noted.
In 2018 when the data were collected, dry eye disease diagnosis among practitioners was not standardised and there was little agreement on subclassification to inform the optimal treatment strategy. Future studies will determine whether recent global consensus reports and position papers unify diagnosis of the disease to improve the quality of epidemiological and treatment efficacy data.
This is a 2020 ARVO Annual Meeting abstract.
This PDF is available to Subscribers Only