Glaucoma: the patient’s perspective

Imrie, Claire E.; Tatham, Andrew J.

doi:10.3399/bjgp16x685165

Cited by 17 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In Europe, 7.8 million people were affected by POAG and the total prevalence is 2.51% [8][9][10]. The most common type of glaucoma in the UK is POAG, affecting 2% of individuals older than 40 years and 10% of individuals older than 75 years, particularly African-Caribbean people; PACG is not as prevalent and only affects 0.17% of individuals younger than 40 years, particularly East Asians [4]. One study has indicated that socioeconomic differences or inequalities have affected glaucoma services [7][8][9].…”

Section: Prevalence Of Glaucomamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Glaucoma is the leading cause of irreversible blindness worldwide and is associated with a reduced quality of life [3]. Risk factors include age and frailty, gender, myopia, genetics, family history, smoking, race, systemic hypotension and hypertension, vasospasm, use of systemic or topical steroids, migraine, obstructive sleep apnea syndrome, and most significantly, increased IOP [4][5][6].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Epidemiology of Glaucoma: The Past, Present, and Predictions for the Future

Allison

Patel

Alabi

2020

Cureus

296

197

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Glaucoma is a multifactorial optic degenerative neuropathy characterized by the loss of retinal ganglion cells. It is a combination of vascular, genetic, anatomical, and immune factors. Glaucoma poses a significant public health concern as it is the second leading cause of blindness after cataracts, and this blindness is usually irreversible. It is estimated that 57.5 million people worldwide are affected by primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG). People over 60 years of age, family members of those already diagnosed with glaucoma, steroid users, diabetics, as well as those with high myopia, hypertension, central cornea thickness of <5 mm, and eye injury are at an increased risk of glaucoma. By 2020, it is expected that approximately 76 million people will suffer from glaucoma with that number estimated to reach 111.8 million by 2040. In this article, we perform an extensive literature review focusing on the epidemiology of glaucoma and try to determine the number of people affected; we categorize them by sex, location, and level of income. Furthermore, we strive to estimate the future projection of the disease in the next 20 years (2040) while determining the disease burden, including the cost involved in treating and preventing the disease and the disease and disability projection of glaucoma.

show abstract

Section: Prevalence Of Glaucomamentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Epidemiology of Glaucoma: The Past, Present, and Predictions for the Future

Allison

Patel

Alabi

2020

Cureus

296

197

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The reduction in light scattered by the retinal nerve fiber layer (RFNL) near the optic nerve head is assumed to be an early indicator of axonal degeneration and a sensitive way to identify glaucomatous damage [ 4 , 5 ]. Several risk factors for glaucoma onset are known, such as age, gender, family history of glaucoma, genetics, race (no white ethnicity), myopia, pseudoexfoliation, disc hemorrhage, vasospasm, systemic hypotension/hypertension, obstructive sleep apnea syndrome, smoking, and last but not least increased intraocular pressure (IOP) [ 6 , 7 , 8 ]. Among all these risk factors the main one has been shown to be elevated IOP.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ocular Tolerability of Bimatoprost 0.1 mg/mL Preservative-Free versus Bimatoprost 0.1 mg/mL with Benzalkonium Chloride or Bimatoprost 0.3 mg/mL Preservative-Free in Patients with Primary Open-Angle Glaucoma

Filippelli

Campagna

Ciampa

et al. 2022

JCM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study aimed to evaluate whether the therapeutic switch from a formulation of Bimatoprost 0.1 mg/mL with benzalkonium chloride (BAK) or Bimatoprost 0.3 mg/mL preservative-free to a formulation of Bimatoprost 0.1 mg/mL preservative-free could improve eye surface conditions in patients with glaucoma; intraocular pressure (IOP) was also evaluated. All patients meeting the inclusion criteria were eligible for the therapeutic switch to Bimatoprost 0.1 mg/mL preservative-free. At each check visit, enrolled patients underwent a break-up time (BUT) test, an ocular surface disease index (OSDI) test, and a three-point tonometric curve. A total of 40 patients were enrolled (23 were in therapy with Bimatoprost 0.1 mg/mL with BAK and 17 with Bimatoprost 0.3 mg/mL preservative-free). Significant differences of OSDI and BUT between Bimatoprost 0.1 mg/mL with BAK at baseline vs. Bimatoprost 0.1 mg/mL preservative-free at 14 and 28 days (p < 0.0001 and p = 0.0003, respectively) were recorded. Similarly, significant differences of OSDI and BUT between Bimatoprost 0.3 mg/mL preservative-free at baseline vs. Bimatoprost 0.1 mg/mL preservative-free at 14 and 28 days (p < 0.0001 for both) were found. Bimatoprost 0.1 mg/mL preservative-free has a better tolerability profile associated with non-therapeutical inferiority in the control of IOP compared to the other Bimatoprost formulations.

show abstract

“…For instance, a 2013 case reported a 37-year-old man that presented with NF with an LRINEC score of zero calling attention to clinicians to focus on clinical suspicion even if validated scores reveal no concern [ 12 ]. In another case, the authors described a patient who presented to a primary care clinic with symptoms of cellulitis but was ultimately diagnosed with NF after an initial misdiagnosis based on a low LRINEC score [ 13 ]. The converse has been shown to be possible as well: authors of a 2014 case report described a situation where reliance on the LRINEC score led to unnecessary diagnostic tests and delayed treatment in a patient with NF of the breast [ 14 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Case Report of Culture-Negative Necrotizing Fasciitis With Low Laboratory Risk Indicator for Necrotizing Fasciitis (LRINEC) Score: A Diagnostic Dilemma

Rathore¹,

Reich²,

Qadir³

et al. 2023

Cureus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Laboratory Risk Indicator for Necrotizing Fasciitis (LRINEC) score is a diagnostic tool used to help clinicians identify necrotizing fasciitis (NF) in its early stages. This tool uses six laboratory values including the patient's white blood cell count, C-reactive protein level, serum sodium level, creatinine level, and hemoglobin level to help with risk stratification. Each of these laboratory values is assigned a point value and the total score is used to determine the likelihood that a patient has NF, with a score of 6 or higher considered to be strongly indicative. The LRINEC score has gained popularity in recent years, having been included in guidelines and society recommendations for the management of NF. However, some studies have challenged the validity of the LRINEC score. Prompt and accurate diagnosis of NF is imperative given the associated mortality rate, which can be as high as 30%-40%, especially if the diagnosis is delayed. We present a case of a patient with a delayed diagnosis of NF that was initially missed in the early stages in the setting of a low LRINEC, however, growing clinical suspicion eventually led to an accurate diagnosis and management.

show abstract

Glaucoma: the patient’s perspective

Cited by 17 publications

References 4 publications

Epidemiology of Glaucoma: The Past, Present, and Predictions for the Future

Epidemiology of Glaucoma: The Past, Present, and Predictions for the Future

Ocular Tolerability of Bimatoprost 0.1 mg/mL Preservative-Free versus Bimatoprost 0.1 mg/mL with Benzalkonium Chloride or Bimatoprost 0.3 mg/mL Preservative-Free in Patients with Primary Open-Angle Glaucoma

A Case Report of Culture-Negative Necrotizing Fasciitis With Low Laboratory Risk Indicator for Necrotizing Fasciitis (LRINEC) Score: A Diagnostic Dilemma

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About