MicroShunt versus Trabeculectomy for Surgical Management of Glaucoma: A Retrospective Analysis.

This case-control study aims to compare the efficacy, safety, and postoperative burden of MicroShunt versus trabeculectomy. The first consecutive cohort of MicroShunt procedures (n = 101) was matched to recent historical trabeculectomy procedures (n = 101) at two London hospital trusts. Primary endpoints included changes in intraocular pressure (IOP) and glaucoma medications. Secondary outcome measures included changes in retinal nerve fibre layer (RNFL) thickness, rates of complications, further theatre interventions, and the number of postoperative visits. From the baseline to Month-18, the median [interquartile range] IOP decreased from 22 [17-29] mmHg (on 4 [3-4] medications) to 15 [10-17] mmHg (on 0 [0-2] medications) and from 20 [16-28] mmHg (on 4 [3-4] medications) to 11 [10-13] mmHg (on 0 [0-0] medications) in the MicroShunt and trabeculectomy groups, respectively. IOP from Month-3 was significantly higher in the MicroShunt group (p = 0.006), with an increased number of medications from Month-12 (p = 0.024). There were greater RNFL thicknesses from Month-6 in the MicroShunt group (p = 0.005). The rates of complications were similar (p = 0.060) but with fewer interventions (p = 0.031) and postoperative visits (p = 0.001) in the MicroShunt group. Therefore, MicroShunt has inferior efficacy to trabeculectomy in lowering IOP and medications but provides a better safety profile and postoperative burden and may delay RNFL loss.

Perceptions of training in gonioscopy.

PURPOSE: To evaluate ophthalmology trainees' perception of their gonioscopy learning experience in the Ophthalmology Specialty Training programme. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A cross-sectional electronic survey was conducted amongst ophthalmology trainees across London Deaneries. The ten questions survey collected parameters, including training grade, previous level of gonioscopy training, confidence in performing the procedure, level of satisfaction with the training formats received, potential barriers and improvements to the training programme. The respondents were also invited to express any additional comments. RESULTS: Fifty-seven complete responses were analysed. The respondents included 25 junior trainees (ST1-3) and 32 senior trainees (ST4-7 and fellows). One-fifth of the respondents (11/57) were unconfident in performing gonioscopy, the majority being junior trainees (9/11). Over a quarter of the respondents were dissatisfied with the quantity of the gonioscopy training received. Teaching formats, such as consultant teaching (mean 8.0 ± 0.50), self-directed learning (mean 8.0 ± 0.38) and small-group tutorials (mean 7.6 ± 1.6) were all well received. Overall, lack of clinical time was considered as the major barrier to gonioscopy training; however, lack of training was considered as the major barrier in the low-confidence group. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlighted ophthalmology trainees' dissatisfaction in the current gonioscopy training curriculum and a lack of confidence in performing the procedure. Appropriate modifications to the Ophthalmology Specialty Training programme could enhance trainees' gonioscopy learning experience.

Correction: How do paper and electronic records compare for completeness? A three centre study.

Following the publication of the above article the authors noted an error in the author list, 2 authors were mistakenly omitted. Zena Rodrigues and Faisal Ahmed have now been added to the author list and the PDF and HTML versions of the paper have been corrected.

How do paper and electronic records compare for completeness? A three centre study.

OBJECTIVES: Medical records are legal documentation of patients' care hence must be accurate and complete for both medical and legal purposes. Electronic patient record (EPR) systems aim to improve the accuracy of documentation, provide better organisation and access of data. This study compares the completeness of traditional note records and EPR in glaucoma patients. METHODS: Using criteria from the April 2009 National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines completeness of data entry was compared between EPR and paper notes in three units. Moorfields Eye Hospital (City Road) uses the Openeyes EPR. Bedford Hospital (Moorfields Eye Centre) and Western Eye Hospital use the Medisoft EPR. The standard was set at 100% compliance for predetermined parameters. RESULTS: One hundred seventy paper notes and 270 electronic records were analysed. With the exception of central corneal thickness (p = 0.31), all other key parameters were more consistently recorded in the paper records than in the EPR. Intraocular pressure (p = 0.004), anterior chamber configuration and depth assessments using gonioscopy (p < 0.001), fundus examination (p = 0.015), past medical history (p < 0.001), medication including glaucoma medication (p < 0.001) and drug allergies (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Our results show that paper records are significantly more complete than EPR. This is the case for two different EPRs and three separate sites. We propose additional training to aid data-collection; improving the design of EPRs by investigating factors such as layout and use of forced choice fields.