Purchase this article with an account.
Facundo Gregorio Sanchez, Steven L Mansberger, Yungtai Kung, Stuart Keith Gardiner, Claude F Burgoyne, Emily P Jones, Robert M Kinast; Novel Eye Drop Delivery Aid Preferred Over Traditional Eye Drop Delivery. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2020;61(7):2663.
Download citation file:
© ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)
Most patients struggle administering eye drops.1 The nose-pivoted drop delivery device (NPDD, Bedo Solutions LLC, Portland, OR) uses a silicone sleeve that balances on the bridge of the nose to precisely position an eye drop bottle (Figure 1). This study compares use of the NPDD with traditional eye drop delivery in glaucoma subjects.
We enrolled 50 consecutive glaucoma subjects who reported difficulty administering eye drops (55 screened, 91% response rate). Subjects self-administered artificial tears at baseline with their own traditional techniques. After a standardized 2-minute teaching intervention on the recommended technique for traditional delivery and NPDD, subjects self-administered eye drops again with these two techniques in random order. Subjects rated ease of eye drop delivery on a 1 to 10 scale (10-easiest) after each instillation; and completed a 5-point Likert survey at the start and end of the study to determine self-perceived success administering eye drops. The end survey also assessed whether subjects found the device comfortable to use and would recommend it to a family member or friend.
47 of 50 (94%) subjects preferred the NPDD device over traditional eye drop delivery. The mean score (± SD) for ease of use was 6.7 ± 2.1 at baseline, 7.0 ± 2.0 for post-teaching traditional, and 8.9 ± 1.1 for the NPDD. The NPDD score was significantly higher than either baseline or post-teaching traditional (p<0.001, logistic-transformed GEE regression). Subjects’ self-perceived ability to successfully place eye drops increased from baseline (3.5 ± 1.4) with the NPDD (4.6 ± 0.7, p<0.001) but not with post-teaching traditional technique (3.3 ± 1.3, p=0.32). Subjects also felt the bottle tip was less likely to touch the eye with the NPDD (5.0 ± 0.2, p<0.001) compared to traditional technique before (3.9 ± 1.3) and after teaching (3.3 ± 1.5). All but 1 participant agreed that the NPDD was comfortable to use, and would recommend the device to a family member or friend who uses eye drops.
After a brief demonstration followed by a single use of the device, experienced glaucoma eye drop users preferred the NPDD over traditional eye drop delivery. The NPDD increased subjects’ self-perceived eye drop administration accuracy and ability to avoid bottle tip contact with the eye.1. Gupta et al, J Glaucoma 2012
This is a 2020 ARVO Annual Meeting abstract.
This PDF is available to Subscribers Only