Response

Abstract

poor template to use for more general optometric management of ocular disease. Indeed, we have clearly stated that much uveitis is complex and often involves undiagnosed systemic inflammatory disease. The management of uveitis involves a degree of systemic historytaking, systemic examination and systemic disease investigation that is rightly and usually the role of non-optometric practitioners.Our aim was to inform optometrists intending to treat uveitis about specific issues regarding the diagnosis and management of anterior uveitis. It was never our intention to make broader political points regarding general optometric prescribing. Indeed, to have done so in an academic article regarding uveitis would have been inappropriate. For the guest editor to have seen such intent in our article, and drawn such conclusions from our article, was we believe, inappropriate. 2 The editorial was an interesting overview of the history and political evolution of optometric prescribing, however, our article was a careful and detailed summary of the specific diagnostic and therapeutic issues in acute anterior uveitis. REFERENCESIt was interpreted by the guest editor as using 'uveitis as a vehicle to examine some of the key issues related to optometry as a primary therapeutic profession, such as which conditions that we should treat and the range of drugs that optometrist should be able to prescribe'. This was not our intent in writing the review. Unlike many other anterior segment diseases, uveitis is commonly associated with systemic conditions. We do not believe the review could be fairly interpreted as an article regarding the full scope of optometric prescribing.Further, the guest editor argues that 'the guidelines, principles of treatment and referral criteria proposed by the authors for uveitis can translate and act as a model across most ocular diseases'. While we did address treatment and referral criteria for management of uveitis, we would argue that uveitis is a very EDITOR:In reply to the comments from Associate Professor Gutteridge and Dr Hall, I believe that it is appropriate for an editorial in an academic journal to provide an overview or interpretation of a published article. By definition, editorials are the opinions of the persons writing them. When referring to the excellent article of Gutteridge and Hall in the editorial (Clin Exp Optom 2007; 9: 67-69), I described how in the primary eye-care setting generally, the use of evidence-based clinical guidelines and co-operation between optometry and ophthalmology, and not the management of uveitis in isolation as asserted, can act as a model to develop appropriate clinical pathways. Appropriate guidelines, principles of treatment and referral criteria for a variety of eye conditions can only contribute to better patient management and positive outcomes.