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...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: 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
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