Eyelid retraction discomfort with cotton-tipped applicator, unimanual and speculum intravitreal injection techniques: Eyelid retraction technique randomized comparison trial (Eyelid RETRACT)
Purpose: The aim of this study was to test the discomfort experienced during intravitreal injections with eyelid retraction between an eyelid speculum, cotton-tipped applicator (CTA), and unimanual eyelid retraction techniques. Methods: In total, 99 patients receiving intravitreal bevacizumab were e...
Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications
2020-01-01
|
Series: | Indian Journal of Ophthalmology |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | http://www.ijo.in/article.asp?issn=0301-4738;year=2020;volume=68;issue=8;spage=1593;epage=1595;aulast=Raevis |
id |
doaj-3007c83398ea409e9817611caf74a2c5 |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-3007c83398ea409e9817611caf74a2c52020-11-25T03:13:21ZengWolters Kluwer Medknow PublicationsIndian Journal of Ophthalmology0301-47381998-36892020-01-016881593159510.4103/ijo.IJO_2043_19Eyelid retraction discomfort with cotton-tipped applicator, unimanual and speculum intravitreal injection techniques: Eyelid retraction technique randomized comparison trial (Eyelid RETRACT)Joseph J RaevisMatthew D KarlAnthony M ParendoKonstantin AstafurovAndrew G DugueSteven A AgemyAllison E RizzutiJoseph TsengWayne ScottKatelin Reaney-PerrottiJohn LaudiEric M ShrierPurpose: The aim of this study was to test the discomfort experienced during intravitreal injections with eyelid retraction between an eyelid speculum, cotton-tipped applicator (CTA), and unimanual eyelid retraction techniques. Methods: In total, 99 patients receiving intravitreal bevacizumab were enrolled into this prospective study. Participants were randomized to one of the three methods, given subconjunctival 2% lidocaine and then injected in the superior temporal quadrant. Immediately after the procedure, each patient was given a visual analog scale (VAS) to rate their discomfort. Results: The mean pain scores for eyelid retraction with unimanual, CTA, and speculum groups were 0.788 (standard deviation [SD] 0.70, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.448–1.128), 0.945 (SD 1.28, 95% CI 0.600–1.291), and 1.561 (SD 1.28, 95% CI 1.210–1.912), respectively. A one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) test revealed a significant difference between the groups (P = 0.006). Post hoc analysis also revealed a difference in mean pain scores between the speculum and both the CTA and the unimanual methods. Conclusion: Our study shows that the unimanual and CTA methods for eyelid retraction are significantly less painful for patients compared to the speculum method. Patient comfort is of the utmost importance as intravitreal injections are performed millions of times a year with most patients requiring multiple injections.http://www.ijo.in/article.asp?issn=0301-4738;year=2020;volume=68;issue=8;spage=1593;epage=1595;aulast=Raeviscotton-tipped applicatoreyelid retractioneyelid speculumintravitreal injectionunimanualvisual analog scale |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
Joseph J Raevis Matthew D Karl Anthony M Parendo Konstantin Astafurov Andrew G Dugue Steven A Agemy Allison E Rizzuti Joseph Tseng Wayne Scott Katelin Reaney-Perrotti John Laudi Eric M Shrier |
spellingShingle |
Joseph J Raevis Matthew D Karl Anthony M Parendo Konstantin Astafurov Andrew G Dugue Steven A Agemy Allison E Rizzuti Joseph Tseng Wayne Scott Katelin Reaney-Perrotti John Laudi Eric M Shrier Eyelid retraction discomfort with cotton-tipped applicator, unimanual and speculum intravitreal injection techniques: Eyelid retraction technique randomized comparison trial (Eyelid RETRACT) Indian Journal of Ophthalmology cotton-tipped applicator eyelid retraction eyelid speculum intravitreal injection unimanual visual analog scale |
author_facet |
Joseph J Raevis Matthew D Karl Anthony M Parendo Konstantin Astafurov Andrew G Dugue Steven A Agemy Allison E Rizzuti Joseph Tseng Wayne Scott Katelin Reaney-Perrotti John Laudi Eric M Shrier |
author_sort |
Joseph J Raevis |
title |
Eyelid retraction discomfort with cotton-tipped applicator, unimanual and speculum intravitreal injection techniques: Eyelid retraction technique randomized comparison trial (Eyelid RETRACT) |
title_short |
Eyelid retraction discomfort with cotton-tipped applicator, unimanual and speculum intravitreal injection techniques: Eyelid retraction technique randomized comparison trial (Eyelid RETRACT) |
title_full |
Eyelid retraction discomfort with cotton-tipped applicator, unimanual and speculum intravitreal injection techniques: Eyelid retraction technique randomized comparison trial (Eyelid RETRACT) |
title_fullStr |
Eyelid retraction discomfort with cotton-tipped applicator, unimanual and speculum intravitreal injection techniques: Eyelid retraction technique randomized comparison trial (Eyelid RETRACT) |
title_full_unstemmed |
Eyelid retraction discomfort with cotton-tipped applicator, unimanual and speculum intravitreal injection techniques: Eyelid retraction technique randomized comparison trial (Eyelid RETRACT) |
title_sort |
eyelid retraction discomfort with cotton-tipped applicator, unimanual and speculum intravitreal injection techniques: eyelid retraction technique randomized comparison trial (eyelid retract) |
publisher |
Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications |
series |
Indian Journal of Ophthalmology |
issn |
0301-4738 1998-3689 |
publishDate |
2020-01-01 |
description |
Purpose: The aim of this study was to test the discomfort experienced during intravitreal injections with eyelid retraction between an eyelid speculum, cotton-tipped applicator (CTA), and unimanual eyelid retraction techniques. Methods: In total, 99 patients receiving intravitreal bevacizumab were enrolled into this prospective study. Participants were randomized to one of the three methods, given subconjunctival 2% lidocaine and then injected in the superior temporal quadrant. Immediately after the procedure, each patient was given a visual analog scale (VAS) to rate their discomfort. Results: The mean pain scores for eyelid retraction with unimanual, CTA, and speculum groups were 0.788 (standard deviation [SD] 0.70, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.448–1.128), 0.945 (SD 1.28, 95% CI 0.600–1.291), and 1.561 (SD 1.28, 95% CI 1.210–1.912), respectively. A one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) test revealed a significant difference between the groups (P = 0.006). Post hoc analysis also revealed a difference in mean pain scores between the speculum and both the CTA and the unimanual methods. Conclusion: Our study shows that the unimanual and CTA methods for eyelid retraction are significantly less painful for patients compared to the speculum method. Patient comfort is of the utmost importance as intravitreal injections are performed millions of times a year with most patients requiring multiple injections. |
topic |
cotton-tipped applicator eyelid retraction eyelid speculum intravitreal injection unimanual visual analog scale |
url |
http://www.ijo.in/article.asp?issn=0301-4738;year=2020;volume=68;issue=8;spage=1593;epage=1595;aulast=Raevis |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT josephjraevis eyelidretractiondiscomfortwithcottontippedapplicatorunimanualandspeculumintravitrealinjectiontechniqueseyelidretractiontechniquerandomizedcomparisontrialeyelidretract AT matthewdkarl eyelidretractiondiscomfortwithcottontippedapplicatorunimanualandspeculumintravitrealinjectiontechniqueseyelidretractiontechniquerandomizedcomparisontrialeyelidretract AT anthonymparendo eyelidretractiondiscomfortwithcottontippedapplicatorunimanualandspeculumintravitrealinjectiontechniqueseyelidretractiontechniquerandomizedcomparisontrialeyelidretract AT konstantinastafurov eyelidretractiondiscomfortwithcottontippedapplicatorunimanualandspeculumintravitrealinjectiontechniqueseyelidretractiontechniquerandomizedcomparisontrialeyelidretract AT andrewgdugue eyelidretractiondiscomfortwithcottontippedapplicatorunimanualandspeculumintravitrealinjectiontechniqueseyelidretractiontechniquerandomizedcomparisontrialeyelidretract AT stevenaagemy eyelidretractiondiscomfortwithcottontippedapplicatorunimanualandspeculumintravitrealinjectiontechniqueseyelidretractiontechniquerandomizedcomparisontrialeyelidretract AT allisonerizzuti eyelidretractiondiscomfortwithcottontippedapplicatorunimanualandspeculumintravitrealinjectiontechniqueseyelidretractiontechniquerandomizedcomparisontrialeyelidretract AT josephtseng eyelidretractiondiscomfortwithcottontippedapplicatorunimanualandspeculumintravitrealinjectiontechniqueseyelidretractiontechniquerandomizedcomparisontrialeyelidretract AT waynescott eyelidretractiondiscomfortwithcottontippedapplicatorunimanualandspeculumintravitrealinjectiontechniqueseyelidretractiontechniquerandomizedcomparisontrialeyelidretract AT katelinreaneyperrotti eyelidretractiondiscomfortwithcottontippedapplicatorunimanualandspeculumintravitrealinjectiontechniqueseyelidretractiontechniquerandomizedcomparisontrialeyelidretract AT johnlaudi eyelidretractiondiscomfortwithcottontippedapplicatorunimanualandspeculumintravitrealinjectiontechniqueseyelidretractiontechniquerandomizedcomparisontrialeyelidretract AT ericmshrier eyelidretractiondiscomfortwithcottontippedapplicatorunimanualandspeculumintravitrealinjectiontechniqueseyelidretractiontechniquerandomizedcomparisontrialeyelidretract |
_version_ |
1724647343626649600 |