Search Results

Abstract

PURPOSE: To analyze the quality of life and treatment adherence of patients with glaucoma at different disease stages, considering factors such as sex, visual acuity, disease severity, and treatment characteristics.
METHODS: This cross-sectional study included 174 patients (346 glaucomatous eyes) recruited from clinical records and routine follow-ups at a specialized ophthalmology center. Their mean age was 39–90 years, and 60.9% of them were women. Their quality of life and adherence were assessed using the NEI-VFQ25 and MMAS-8 questionnaires, respectively. Complementary tests included 24:2 visual field test, retinography, and optical coherence tomography. Patients diagnosed with glaucoma for at least 6 months were included, whereas pregnant patients and those with ocular diseases were excluded.
RESULTS: Among the participants, 59.2% adhered to the treatment whereas 40.8% showed low adherence. The mean quality of life score was 81.87. Patients with low adherence had slightly higher quality of life scores (mean 83.1) than those with good adherence (mean 81.0), but the difference was not statistically significant. Disease severity was associated with increased optic nerve cupping, reduced thickness of the nerve fiber and ganglion cell layers, and great visual field loss. No significant correlation was observed between adherence and quality of life, indicating the independence of these factors and the influence of psychological or social elements.
CONCLUSION: The absence of a correlation between quality of life and treatment adherence highlights the need for tailored interventions for psychological and social aspects. These findings indicate the importance of a comprehensive approach to managing glaucoma, preserving visual function, strengthening doctor–patient relationships, and considering psychosocial factors to enhance quality of life and treatment adherence.

Keywords: Glaucoma; Quality of life; Patient health questionnaire; Patient acuity; Antiglaucoma agents; Visual acuity; Treatment adherence and compliance; Surveys and questionnaires

Abstract

PURPOSE: To evaluate the reliability and comparability of a Scheimpflug-based tomographer relative to a Placido-based topographer and specular microscopy in healthy eyes.
METHODS: This cross-sectional study included 40 patients (80 eyes). Each eye underwent randomized imaging with a Scheimpflug-based tomographer, a Placido-based topographer, and Tomey EM-4000 specular microscopy. Three acquisitions per device were obtained. For interdevice comparisons, the best-quality scan per eye/device was selected, whereas all three scans were used for intradevice repeatability analyses. Unreliable scans were repeated (up to five attempts) and excluded if acceptable quality was not achieved, resulting in variable denominators. Between-device comparisons were performed using generalized estimating equations with participant-level clustering and robust standard errors and were supplemented by Bland–Altman analysis.
RESULTS: The effective sample size varied by parameter (independent summaries: 59–67 eyes; paired comparisons: 48–51 eyes). In paired-eye analyses, the Scheimpflug-based tomographer measured slightly higher keratometry values than the Placido-based topographer (K1: 43.95 vs. 43.78 D, p=0.003; K2: 44.91 vs 44.73 D, p=0.002), more negative Q-values (p=0.001), smaller photopic pupil diameter (p<0.001), and shorter kappa distance (p<0.001). Mean absolute differences were 0.32 D for K1 and 0.30 D for K2, with high dispersion for angular metrics (kappa angle coefficient of variation: 195%).
CONCLUSIONS: The Scheimpflug-based tomographer provides reproducible corneal measurements in healthy eyes. However, systematic differences relative to the Placido-based topographer—particularly for keratometry, asphericity, and pupil and kappa metrics—suggest limited interchangeability. Consistent device use is recommended when these parameters inform clinical decision-making.

Keywords: Scheimpflug tomography; Placido topography; Specular microscopy; keratometry; Corneal imaging; Refractive surgical procedures; Lenses, intraocular