TY - JOUR
T1 - Comparison of the usability of eye drop aids and the conventional bottle
AU - Brand, Gali
AU - Hecht, Idan
AU - Burgansky-Eliash, Zvia
AU - Haim, Liron Naftali Ben
AU - Leadbetter, Duncan
AU - Spierer, Oriel
AU - Achiron, Asaf
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
PY - 2021/12/1
Y1 - 2021/12/1
N2 - (1) Background: Eye drops are the most common route of administration for ophthalmic medications. Administering drops can be a major hurdle for patients, potentially resulting in noncompliance and treatment failure. The purpose of this study is to compare the efficacy and safety of two different aids and the conventional bottle for eye drop instillation; (2) Methods: An interventional crossover study involving standard eye drop bottle, Opticare aid and Autodrop aid. The study included healthy subjects without a history of regular eye drop use; (3) Results: Twenty-six subjects were enrolled. Of those subjects, 96% and 92% were able to assemble the eye drop bottle into the Autodrop and the Opticare aids, respectively. Subjective assessment indicated that Autodrop was significantly easier to assemble than Opticare (95% CI: −1.6802 to −0.1659, p = 0.02). When using either aid, there was no contamination of the bottle tip, which occurred in 46% of subjects when no aid was used (p = 0.0005). Fewer drops were expelled when using the conventional bottle as compared to the aids (p = 0.05 compared to Autodrop, p = 0.1 compared to Opticare); (4) Conclusions: Autodrop and Opticare can assist patients with eye drop placement. These aids completely prevented bottle tip contamination, which was frequently observed when the conventional bottle was used alone.
AB - (1) Background: Eye drops are the most common route of administration for ophthalmic medications. Administering drops can be a major hurdle for patients, potentially resulting in noncompliance and treatment failure. The purpose of this study is to compare the efficacy and safety of two different aids and the conventional bottle for eye drop instillation; (2) Methods: An interventional crossover study involving standard eye drop bottle, Opticare aid and Autodrop aid. The study included healthy subjects without a history of regular eye drop use; (3) Results: Twenty-six subjects were enrolled. Of those subjects, 96% and 92% were able to assemble the eye drop bottle into the Autodrop and the Opticare aids, respectively. Subjective assessment indicated that Autodrop was significantly easier to assemble than Opticare (95% CI: −1.6802 to −0.1659, p = 0.02). When using either aid, there was no contamination of the bottle tip, which occurred in 46% of subjects when no aid was used (p = 0.0005). Fewer drops were expelled when using the conventional bottle as compared to the aids (p = 0.05 compared to Autodrop, p = 0.1 compared to Opticare); (4) Conclusions: Autodrop and Opticare can assist patients with eye drop placement. These aids completely prevented bottle tip contamination, which was frequently observed when the conventional bottle was used alone.
KW - Bottle tip contamination
KW - Compliance to treatment
KW - Eye drops
KW - Eye drops administration aids
KW - Glaucoma treatment
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85120082331&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.3390/jcm10235658
DO - 10.3390/jcm10235658
M3 - ???researchoutput.researchoutputtypes.contributiontojournal.article???
C2 - 34884360
AN - SCOPUS:85120082331
SN - 2077-0383
VL - 10
JO - Journal of Clinical Medicine
JF - Journal of Clinical Medicine
IS - 23
M1 - 5658
ER -