Molham A Elbakary, Osama E Shalaby, Waleed A Allam, Ahmed R Alagorie, Heba M Shafik
{"title":"强脉冲光疗法与穿刺栓塞疗法相比，干眼症患者的生活质量有所改善。","authors":"Molham A Elbakary, Osama E Shalaby, Waleed A Allam, Ahmed R Alagorie, Heba M Shafik","doi":"10.4103/ojo.ojo_85_23","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The purpose of the study was to evaluate the quality of life (QOL) improvement in evaporative dry eye patients after treatment with intense pulsed light (IPL) therapy compared to punctal plug insertion.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A prospective comparative interventional study included 30 patients with moderate-to-severe evaporative dry eye. Patients' QOL affection before and after treatment was assessed by the Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI) questionnaire. Fifteen patients were treated with IPL therapy (Group 1). The other 15 patients were treated with silicone punctal plug insertion (Group 2).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Improvement of patients' QOL was noticed in all patients of Group 1, with significant improvement of OSDI score from a mean value of 56.9 to 22.9 (<i>P</i> = 0.001). Improvement was noticed in 80% of Group 2 patients (mean OSDI score pretreatment: 53.8 and posttreatment: 31.7, <i>P</i> = 0.017). The tear breakup time (TBUT) in Group 1 significantly improved from a mean of 3.2 s to 5.9 s (<i>P</i> = 0.001), whereas it showed no significant changes in Group 2 (mean TBUT pretreatment: 3.6 s and posttreatment: 3.9 s, <i>P</i> = 0.654). Complications occurred in 13.3% in Group 2, including punctal granuloma and proximal canalicular obstruction. No adverse effects were recorded in Group 1.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>IPL therapy had better results with more improvement of patients' QOL compared to punctal plugs. It also showed a better safety profile with no reported complications.</p>","PeriodicalId":19461,"journal":{"name":"Oman Journal of Ophthalmology","volume":"17 1","pages":"108-112"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10957059/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Quality of life improvement in dry eye patients after intense pulsed light therapy compared to punctal plugs.\",\"authors\":\"Molham A Elbakary, Osama E Shalaby, Waleed A Allam, Ahmed R Alagorie, Heba M Shafik\",\"doi\":\"10.4103/ojo.ojo_85_23\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The purpose of the study was to evaluate the quality of life (QOL) improvement in evaporative dry eye patients after treatment with intense pulsed light (IPL) therapy compared to punctal plug insertion.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A prospective comparative interventional study included 30 patients with moderate-to-severe evaporative dry eye. Patients' QOL affection before and after treatment was assessed by the Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI) questionnaire. Fifteen patients were treated with IPL therapy (Group 1). The other 15 patients were treated with silicone punctal plug insertion (Group 2).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Improvement of patients' QOL was noticed in all patients of Group 1, with significant improvement of OSDI score from a mean value of 56.9 to 22.9 (<i>P</i> = 0.001). Improvement was noticed in 80% of Group 2 patients (mean OSDI score pretreatment: 53.8 and posttreatment: 31.7, <i>P</i> = 0.017). The tear breakup time (TBUT) in Group 1 significantly improved from a mean of 3.2 s to 5.9 s (<i>P</i> = 0.001), whereas it showed no significant changes in Group 2 (mean TBUT pretreatment: 3.6 s and posttreatment: 3.9 s, <i>P</i> = 0.654). Complications occurred in 13.3% in Group 2, including punctal granuloma and proximal canalicular obstruction. No adverse effects were recorded in Group 1.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>IPL therapy had better results with more improvement of patients' QOL compared to punctal plugs. It also showed a better safety profile with no reported complications.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19461,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Oman Journal of Ophthalmology\",\"volume\":\"17 1\",\"pages\":\"108-112\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10957059/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Oman Journal of Ophthalmology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4103/ojo.ojo_85_23\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Oman Journal of Ophthalmology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/ojo.ojo_85_23","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
Quality of life improvement in dry eye patients after intense pulsed light therapy compared to punctal plugs.
Purpose: The purpose of the study was to evaluate the quality of life (QOL) improvement in evaporative dry eye patients after treatment with intense pulsed light (IPL) therapy compared to punctal plug insertion.
Methods: A prospective comparative interventional study included 30 patients with moderate-to-severe evaporative dry eye. Patients' QOL affection before and after treatment was assessed by the Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI) questionnaire. Fifteen patients were treated with IPL therapy (Group 1). The other 15 patients were treated with silicone punctal plug insertion (Group 2).
Results: Improvement of patients' QOL was noticed in all patients of Group 1, with significant improvement of OSDI score from a mean value of 56.9 to 22.9 (P = 0.001). Improvement was noticed in 80% of Group 2 patients (mean OSDI score pretreatment: 53.8 and posttreatment: 31.7, P = 0.017). The tear breakup time (TBUT) in Group 1 significantly improved from a mean of 3.2 s to 5.9 s (P = 0.001), whereas it showed no significant changes in Group 2 (mean TBUT pretreatment: 3.6 s and posttreatment: 3.9 s, P = 0.654). Complications occurred in 13.3% in Group 2, including punctal granuloma and proximal canalicular obstruction. No adverse effects were recorded in Group 1.
Conclusion: IPL therapy had better results with more improvement of patients' QOL compared to punctal plugs. It also showed a better safety profile with no reported complications.
期刊介绍：
To provide a platform for scientific expression of the Oman Ophthalmic Society and the international Ophthalmic community and to provide opportunities for free exchange of ideas and information. To serve as a valuable resource for ophthalmologists, eye-care providers including optometrists, orthoptists, other health care professionals and research workers in all aspects of the field of visual science.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
