Patient experience of and barriers to the eye examination.

IF 3.2 3区 医学 Q1 OPHTHALMOLOGY
Eye Pub Date : 2026-05-06 DOI:10.1038/s41433-026-04499-w
Siyuan Jabelle Lu, Shenouda Girgis, Peter Shah, Graham A Lee
{"title":"Patient experience of and barriers to the eye examination.","authors":"Siyuan Jabelle Lu, Shenouda Girgis, Peter Shah, Graham A Lee","doi":"10.1038/s41433-026-04499-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Ophthalmic examination is central to the diagnosis and monitoring of eye disease. However, there is a paucity of qualitative studies about the patient's experience. The Patient Experience of Eye Examination eValuation Study (PEEEVS) was designed to evaluate patient experiences of key examination-related components of routine ophthalmic care.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>PEEEVS employs a cross-sectional, mixed methods design combining quantitative visual analogue scales (VAS) with qualitative semi-structured interviews. Data from 203 patients (M:F - 101:102) were analysed with respect to their experiences of topical anaesthesia, optical coherence tomography (OCT) imaging, tonometry, slit lamp examination, and mydriasis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Quantitative analysis indicated predominantly favourable responses, with median VAS scores ranging between 88 and 89 for all tests. In contrast, qualitative findings identified specific areas of concern, including challenges with maintaining proper positioning during slit lamp examination and OCT, particularly for individuals with pre-existing neck/back pain, larger body habitus, or advanced pregnancy.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>While participant experience of most monitoring tests was good, specific examination aspects can impact patient comfort and potentially affect long-term adherence to ocular monitoring. The study highlights the need for targeted considerations, such as ergonomic improvements and enhanced patient communication strategies to alleviate discomfort and support sustained engagement in ophthalmic care.</p>","PeriodicalId":12125,"journal":{"name":"Eye","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2026-05-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Eye","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41433-026-04499-w","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Ophthalmic examination is central to the diagnosis and monitoring of eye disease. However, there is a paucity of qualitative studies about the patient's experience. The Patient Experience of Eye Examination eValuation Study (PEEEVS) was designed to evaluate patient experiences of key examination-related components of routine ophthalmic care.

Methods: PEEEVS employs a cross-sectional, mixed methods design combining quantitative visual analogue scales (VAS) with qualitative semi-structured interviews. Data from 203 patients (M:F - 101:102) were analysed with respect to their experiences of topical anaesthesia, optical coherence tomography (OCT) imaging, tonometry, slit lamp examination, and mydriasis.

Results: Quantitative analysis indicated predominantly favourable responses, with median VAS scores ranging between 88 and 89 for all tests. In contrast, qualitative findings identified specific areas of concern, including challenges with maintaining proper positioning during slit lamp examination and OCT, particularly for individuals with pre-existing neck/back pain, larger body habitus, or advanced pregnancy.

Conclusions: While participant experience of most monitoring tests was good, specific examination aspects can impact patient comfort and potentially affect long-term adherence to ocular monitoring. The study highlights the need for targeted considerations, such as ergonomic improvements and enhanced patient communication strategies to alleviate discomfort and support sustained engagement in ophthalmic care.

患者对眼科检查的经验和障碍。
背景:眼科检查是诊断和监测眼病的核心。然而,关于患者体验的定性研究缺乏。患者眼科检查体验评估研究(PEEEVS)旨在评估患者对常规眼科护理中关键检查相关组件的体验。方法:PEEEVS采用定量视觉模拟量表(VAS)与定性半结构化访谈相结合的横截面混合方法设计。我们分析了203例患者(M:F - 101:102)的数据,包括他们的表面麻醉,光学相干断层扫描(OCT)成像,眼压测量,裂隙灯检查和瞳孔。结果:定量分析显示主要是有利的反应,所有测试的VAS评分中位数在88到89之间。相比之下,定性研究结果确定了具体的关注领域,包括在裂隙灯检查和OCT期间保持正确体位的挑战,特别是对于先前存在颈部/背部疼痛、体型较大或妊娠晚期的个体。结论:虽然参与者对大多数监测试验的体验良好,但特定的检查方面可能会影响患者的舒适度,并可能影响长期坚持眼部监测。该研究强调需要有针对性的考虑,如人体工程学的改进和加强患者沟通策略,以减轻不适和支持持续参与眼科护理。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Eye
Eye 医学-眼科学
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
5.10%
发文量
481
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: Eye seeks to provide the international practising ophthalmologist with high quality articles, of academic rigour, on the latest global clinical and laboratory based research. Its core aim is to advance the science and practice of ophthalmology with the latest clinical- and scientific-based research. Whilst principally aimed at the practising clinician, the journal contains material of interest to a wider readership including optometrists, orthoptists, other health care professionals and research workers in all aspects of the field of visual science worldwide. Eye is the official journal of The Royal College of Ophthalmologists. Eye encourages the submission of original articles covering all aspects of ophthalmology including: external eye disease; oculo-plastic surgery; orbital and lacrimal disease; ocular surface and corneal disorders; paediatric ophthalmology and strabismus; glaucoma; medical and surgical retina; neuro-ophthalmology; cataract and refractive surgery; ocular oncology; ophthalmic pathology; ophthalmic genetics.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书