Pain perception during intravitreal injections is related to the timing of instilling anesthetic eyedrops.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the correlation between the timing of instilling anesthetic eyedrops prior to intravitreal injection and the patient's perception of pain associated with the injection. METHODS: A prospective observational study which included 192 eyes of 192 patients. Time interval between instillation of Oxybuprocaine-0.4% and Tetracaine-0.5% eyedrops upon checking-in and injection was measured and pain level was evaluated by the 101-point-Numeric Rating Scale. RESULTS: We found significant correlation between time interval from the first eyedrops to injection and injection related pain. The lowest pain score (11 ± 18) was found in the 11-15 min group, while the highest was found in the 0-6 min (26 ± 25) and in the > 35 min (31 ± 28) groups. The highest percentage of patients without pain was found in the 11-15 min (64%), followed by the 7-10 min (56%) and 16-20 min (47%) groups. 10% or 17% of the 0-6 min or > 35 min. groups, respectively, reported no pain. No patients in 11-15 min group reported severe pain versus 10% in the 0-6 min and 17% in the > 35 min groups. The highest percentage of patients with 'absent-to-mild' pain was in the 11-15 min (89%) and the 7-10 min (87%) compared to all other groups. CONCLUSIONS: Administration of first dose of anesthetic eyedrops within 11-15 min before intravitreal injection yields the lowest levels of injection-related pain, with 7-10 min being second best. Administration of eyedrops outside of this time-window results in higher pain levels avoidable with more attention to the timing issue.

Health Care Use for Eye Pain.

Importance: National estimates regarding the frequency of presentations and patterns of care for eye pain are unknown. This information could guide research and clinical efforts to optimize outcomes. Objective: To estimate eye pain visits in the US in the outpatient and emergency department (ED) settings. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cross-sectional study of National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey and National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey data (2008-2019) analyzed a population-based sample of visits to outpatient clinics and EDs. The sample consisted of patients presenting with eye pain. Data were analyzed from September 2023 to April 2024. Main Outcomes and Measures: Weighted sample data estimated outpatient and ED eye pain presentations including patient and clinician characteristics, diagnoses (International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth Revision [ICD-10]), and disposition. Results: From 2008 through 2019, 4.6 million (95% CI, 3.9 million to 5.3 million) outpatient and 1.0 million (95% CI, 0.8 million to 1.1 million) ED eye pain visits occurred annually. Patients were predominantly women (63.2% [95% CI, 59.4%-67.0%]) and older than 60 years (46.6% [95% CI, 42.4%-51.0%]) in the outpatient setting. Patients presenting to the ED were more often men (51.8% [95% CI, 48.7%-55.0%]) and aged younger than 45 years (aged <15 years: 16.4% [95% CI, 13.9%-18.8%]; 15-24 years: 19.2% [95% CI, 16.6%-21.7%]; and 25-44 years: 35.6% [95% CI, 32.7%-38.5%]). In nearly half of outpatient eye pain visits, the major problem was classified as nonacute (2.0 million [95% CI, 1.6 million to 2.3 million]). Eye pain was the primary reason for the visit (RFV) in 42.0% (95% CI, 37.8%-46.2%) of outpatient visits and 66.9% (95% CI, 62.9%-70.9%) of ED eye pain visits. It was the only RFV in 18.3% (95% CI, 15.0%-21.7%) of outpatient and 32.7% (95% CI, 29.0%-36.4%) of ED eye pain encounters. Ophthalmologists evaluated the largest number of outpatient visits (45.3% [95% CI, 38.8%-51.7%). The primary diagnosis was non-vision threatening for most outpatient (78.5% [95% CI, 56.8%-100%]) and ED (69.9% [95% CI, 62.1%-77.7%]) visits when eye pain was the primary RFV. Additional follow-up was scheduled in 89.4% (95% CI, 86.2%-92.6%) of visits. Conclusions and Relevance: More than 5 million eye pain visits occur annually; the largest percentage are outpatient with ophthalmologists. Most diagnoses were non-vision threatening in both the outpatient and ED setting and resulted in additional care. Expanding therapeutic approaches to treat the causes of eye pain may reduce the burden on the health care system and optimize outcomes.

Corneal neuropathic pain: a review to inform clinical practice.

Corneal neuropathic pain (CNP) is a poorly defined disease entity characterised by an aberrant pain response to normally non-painful stimuli and categorised into having peripheral and central mechanisms, with the former responding to instillation of topical anaesthetic. CNP is a challenging condition to diagnose due to numerous aetiologies, an absence of clinical signs and ancillary tests (in vivo confocal microscopy and esthesiometry), lacking the ability to confirm the diagnosis and having limited availability. Symptomatology maybe mirrored by severe and chronic forms of dry eye disease (DED), often leading to misdiagnosis and inadequate treatment. In practice, patients with suspected CNP can be assessed with questionnaires to elicit symptoms. A thorough ocular assessment is also performed to exclude any co-existent ocular conditions. A medical and mental health history should be sought due to associations with autoimmune disease, chronic pain syndromes, anxiety and depression. Management begins with communicating to the patient the nature of their condition. Ophthalmologists can prescribe topical therapies such as autologous serum eyedrops to optimise the ocular surface and promote neural regeneration. However, a multi-disciplinary treatment approach is often required, including mental health support, particularly when there are central mechanisms. General practitioners, pain specialists, neurologists and psychologists may be needed to assist with oral and behavioural therapies. Less data is available to support the safety and efficacy of adjuvant and surgical therapies and the long-term natural history remains to be determined. Hence clinical trials and registry studies are urgently needed to fill these data gaps with the aim to improve patient care.

Painful Eyes in Neurology Clinic: A Guide for Neurologists.

Eye pain is a common complaint among patients presenting to the neurology clinic. It can be related to neurologic diseases, but it can also be a localized eye condition. Such disorders can be misleading, as their benign appearance might mask more grave underlying conditions, potentially leading to misdiagnoses or delayed treatment. Clinicians should be aware of the specific neurologic or systemic disorders (eg, demyelinating diseases or vascular abnormalities) that might first manifest as eye pain. Formal ophthalmic consultation is recommended for patients presenting with eye pain as the predominant complaint especially when red flags for more serious pathology are present.

Neuropathic Corneal Pain: Tear Proteomic and Neuromediator Profiles, Imaging Features, and Clinical Manifestations.

PURPOSE: To investigate the tear proteomic and neuromediator profiles, in vivo confocal microscopy (IVCM) imaging features, and clinical manifestations in neuropathic corneal pain (NCP) patients. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. METHODS: A total of 20 NCP patients and 20 age-matched controls were recruited. All subjects were evaluated by corneal sensitivity, Schirmer test, tear break-up time, and corneal and ocular surface staining, Ocular Surface Disease Index and Ocular Pain Assessment Survey questionnaires were administered, as well as IVCM examinations for corneal nerves, microneruomas, and epithelial and dendritic cells. Tears were collected for neuromediator and proteomic analysis using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay and data-independent acquisition mass spectrometry. RESULTS: Burning and sensitivity to light were the 2 most common symptoms in NCP. A total of 188 significantly dysregulated proteins, such as elevated metallothionein-2, creatine kinases B-type, vesicle-associated membrane protein 2, neurofilament light polypeptide, and myelin basic protein, were identified in the NCP patients. The top 10 dysregulated biological pathways in NCP include neurotoxicity, axonal signaling, wound healing, neutrophil degradation, apoptosis, thrombin signaling mitochondrial dysfunction, and RHOGDI and P70S6K signaling pathways. Compared to controls, the NCP cohort presented with significantly decreased corneal sensitivity (P < .001), decreased corneal nerve fiber length (P = .003), corneal nerve fiber density (P = .006), and nerve fiber fractal dimension (P = .033), as well as increased corneal nerve fiber width (P = .002), increased length, total area and perimeter of microneuromas (P < .001, P < .001, P = .019), smaller corneal epithelial size (P = .017), and higher nerve growth factor level in tears (P = .006). CONCLUSIONS: These clinical manifestations, imaging features, and molecular characterizations would contribute to the diagnostics and potential therapeutic targets for NCP.

COMPARISON OF THE EFFECTS OF EIGHT DIFFERENT TOPICAL NONSTEROIDAL ANTI-INFLAMMATORY DRUGS ON REDUCING INTRAVITREAL INJECTION-INDUCED PAIN.

PURPOSE: To compare topical nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) efficacy on intravitreal injection-induced pain reduction and determine the most efficient topical NSAID. METHODS: This randomized-controlled study included 662 eyes of 662 patients. Based on the types of NSAID administered before intravitreal injection, eight subgroups were formed. In the control group, a sterile saline solution was applied instead of NSAIDs. The visual analog scale was used to assess pain scores after intravitreal injection. The visual analog scale scores were noted immediately and 6 hours following injection (sixth hour). RESULTS: Nepafenac 0.3%, nepafenac 0.1%, and bromfenac 0.09% had the lowest scores, immediately after and after 6 hours, with no significant differences. Diclofenac and ketorolac had higher visual analog scale scores than the first trio but lower scores than the control group. Flurbiprofen, pranoprofen, and indomethacin did not significantly affect immediate pain; however, at the sixth hour, the visual analog scale scores were significantly reduced. CONCLUSION: Nepafenac 0.3%, nepafenac 0.1%, and bromfenac 0.09% were the most effective NSAIDs for pain reduction. Although some NSAIDs did not have a significant effect on immediate pain, they all provided significant benefits at the sixth hour.

Coexistence of neuropathic corneal pain, corneal nerve abnormalities, depression, and low quality of life.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the quality of life (QoL), mental health conditions and corneal morphology in neuropathic corneal pain (NCP) subjects without a significant ocular surface disease. METHODS: A composite questionnaire was administered to 228 consecutive subjects, assessing the pain intensity, duration, and quality using a modified version of the Self-Administered Leeds Assessment of Neuropathic Symptoms and Signs (S-LANSS) and Pain Detect (PD) questionnaires. Subjects diagnosed with possible central NCP and two sub-groups of patients diagnosed with peripheral ocular pain completed an additional battery of mental health questionnaires and were examined by In Vivo Confocal Microscopy (IVCM). RESULTS: Of the 76 subjects that reported chronic ocular pain (duration >1 month), 53 were classified with probable NCP. Nine subjects without signs that justify the pain and non-responding to topical anaesthesia, were considered affected by central NCP. In these patients, a significant negative correlation was found between the presence pain and the mental component of the QoL (R2 = 0.733), and a positive correlation between the severity of pain the presence post-traumatic stress disorder (R2 = 0.83) and depression (R2 = 0.93). Although neuromas and sprouting had higher frequency in the central NCP group compared the control groups, these differences was not statistically different. CONCLUSIONS: The assessment of ocular pain characteristics using multiple questionnaires and IVCM may help to recognize differences between nociceptive and neuropathic pain. An association between pain intensity and mental health condition may guide the therapeutical choices.

FL-41 Tint Reduces Activation of Neural Pathways of Photophobia in Patients with Chronic Ocular Pain.

PURPOSE: To assess the therapeutic effect of tinted lenses (FL-41) on photophobia and light-evoked brain activity using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) in individuals with chronic ocular surface pain. DESIGN: Prospective case series. METHODS: 25 subjects from the Miami veterans affairs (VA) eye clinic were recruited based on the presence of chronic ocular pain, dry eye symptoms, and photophobia. Using a 3T MRI scanner, subjects underwent 2 fMRI scans using an event-related design based on light stimuli: one scan while wearing FL-41 lenses and one without. Unpleasantness ratings evoked by the light stimuli were collected after each scan. RESULTS: With FL-41 lenses, subjects reported decreased (n = 19), maintained (n = 2), or increased (n = 4) light-evoked unpleasantness ratings. Group analysis at baseline (no lens) revealed significant light evoked responses in bilateral primary somatosensory (S1), bilateral secondary somatosensory (S2), bilateral insula, bilateral frontal pole, visual, precuneus, paracingulate, and anterior cingulate cortices (ACC) as well as cerebellar vermis, bilateral cerebellar hemispheric lobule VI, and bilateral cerebellar crus I and II. With FL-41 lenses, light-evoked responses were significantly decreased in bilateral S1, bilateral S2, bilateral insular, right temporal pole, precuneus, ACC, and paracingulate cortices as well as bilateral cerebellar hemispheric lobule VI. CONCLUSION: FL-41 lenses modulated photophobia symptoms in some individuals with chronic ocular pain. In conjunction, FL-41 lenses decreased activation in cortical areas involved in processing affective and sensory-discriminative dimensions of pain. Further research into these relationships will advance the ability to provide precision therapy for individuals with ocular pain.

[Differential diagnostics of chronic eye pain from a neurological perspective-What can also lie behind it]. / Differenzialdiagnosen chronischer Augenschmerzen aus neurologischer Sicht ­ Was auch dahinterstecken kann.

Periorbital pain and pain in the eye may arise from nociceptive processes such as chronic ocular surface destruction and inflammation, from neuropathic processes or often from a combination of different mechanisms. An important differential diagnosis are primary headache disorders and other neurological diseases, for example of inflammatory origin, which trigger secondary pain. Chronic eye pain therefore requires interdisciplinary collaboration in the diagnostics and treatment.

[Chronic eye pain]. / Der chronische Augenschmerz.

Numerous conditions in the field of ophthalmology are associated with pain in or around the eye. Chronic pain associated with the eye is a common finding in the daily routine of ophthalmologists and can be associated with primary ocular or extraocular diseases as well as with other conditions. Appropriate diagnostic assessment and management of people with chronic pain requires an understanding of the condition based on the biopsychosocial model in which the interactions of biological/somatic, psychological and social factors are determining pain and suffering. Beyond the ophthalmological findings,  close interdisciplinary cooperation and assessment are required. Therefore, if eye pain is insufficiently responsive to treatment or if symptoms of chronic pain are evident, pain medicine expertise should be involved. The management of chronic ocular pain is based on interdisciplinary multimodal approaches, in addition to the ophthalmologist-specific approaches. These focus on self-efficacy, patient competence and acceptance of pain as central goals of treatment rather than pain relief. Patient information, education and the development of a suitable concept by the interdisciplinary team are essential therapeutic aspects in this context.

Evaluation of ocular neuropathic pain.

AIM: To identify and assess the quality of current validated questionnaires that could be used to evaluate ocular neuropathic pain and its associated aetiologies. METHODS: A literature search was performed on MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO and The Cochrane Library. Articles evaluating questionnaires for ocular neuropathic pain and its associated aetiologies were included. Data on psychometric properties, validity, and reliability of the questionnaires was extracted and analysed using a set of quality criteria. Clinical and demographical associations with ocular neuropathic pain were also reviewed. RESULTS: The search generated 1738 results with 61 publications meeting the inclusion criteria. The 61 publications covered 28 questionnaires including 3 ocular pain, 12 dry eye disease, 2 blepharitis, 2 refractive surgery, 3 contact lens wear, 3 Sjogren's Syndrome, and 3 that were non-disease-specific. Only 57 publications provided enough data on psychometric properties and validity of the questionnaire to be included for quality assessment. The Contact Lens Discomfort Index (CLDI) had the highest rated psychometric properties, whereas the English version of the Ocular Comfort Index (OCI) provided the most data on psychometric properties (9 out of 10 criteria). Most ocular pain and disease-specific questionnaires contained appropriate items to assess ocular pain in specific populations. However, non-disease-specific ophthalmic questionnaires demonstrated poor reliability and validity when evaluating ocular pain. CONCLUSION: Ocular pain questionnaires can potentially diagnose ocular neuropathic pain. Disease-specific questionnaires were limited to their target populations, and non-disease-specific ophthalmic questionnaires were unreliable. Further studies are required to determine the most appropriate questionnaire to evaluate ocular neuropathic pain.

Painful-blind eye: A forgotten palliative care.

Painful-blind eye (PBE) is a challenging and debilitating condition that greatly affects the quality of life of patients. Although PBE can result from a variety of etiologies, currently there is no guideline or consensus on how to approach therapeutically these patients, and most treatments are experience-based. We summarized the evidence from available studies to investigate the current state of PBE treatment strategies. This review revealed that the information available about therapeutic approaches in patients with PBE is insufficient and outdated, therefore, new experimental and larger studies are needed to reach an agreement about this condition.

Reliability and validity of the Japanese version of the Ocular pain assessment survey (OPAS-J).

This study aimed to determine the reliability and validity of the Japanese version of the Ocular Pain Assessment Survey (OPAS-J) to measure ocular pain and quality of life. A multi-institutional cross-sectional study was conducted on participants with and without ocular pain. The Wong-Baker FACES® Pain Rating Scale served as the gold standard for measuring the intensity of ocular pain. Sixty-four participants who visited two clinics located in Japan between May 2019 and October 2019 were included in the study. The OPAS was translated and culturally adapted to Japanese. The internal consistency of the OPAS-J was assessed using Cronbach's alpha coefficient. Twenty-four (37.5%) and 40 (62.5%) participants were classified as having ocular pain and no ocular pain, respectively. All dimensions of the OPAS-J had good reliability, with a Cronbach's alpha coefficient of 0.870 for ocular pain intensity over the past 24 h and 0.874, 0.899, 0.874, 0.871, and 0.876 for ocular pain intensity over the past 2 weeks, non-ocular pain, interference with quality of life, aggravating factors, and associated factors, respectively. The OPAS-J is a reliable and responsive tool that can be used to quantify ocular pain intensity.