English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Purpose: To assess current recommendations by optometrists for replacement frequency (RF) of silicone hydrogels (SH) and daily disposable (DD) contact lenses in Canada, determine rates of non-compliance with recommendations by both the optometrist and patient, and investigate reasons for non-compliance. Methods: Survey packages were sent to optometrists in Canada who had agreed to participate. Patients completed survey questions regarding demographics and contact lens wearing patterns, including recommended and actual contact lens RF. Optometrists were asked to provide lens information and their recommendation for RF. Fifty-eight optometrists returned 654 surveys, of which 578 were eligible for analysis. Results: Seventy percent of patients were female with a median age of 32 years. Lens type distribution was 18% DD, 35% two-week SH, and 47% one-month SH. Six percent were worn for extended wear. Daily wear median wearing time was 12 hours/day, a median of five days/week for DD, seven days/week for SH (two-week and one-month). Optometrists’ recommendations were non-compliant with the manufacturers’ recommended RF for 6% of DD, 35% of two week, and 2% of one-month patients. Patients were non-compliant with recommendations from both the manufacturer and optometrist for 12% of DD, 43% of two-week, and 31% of one-month lens wearers. The most common reason for non-compliance was forgetting which day to replace lenses. Fifty-six percent thought a reminder system would help with compliance. A higher proportion of compliant patients followed the RF because of confidence in their optometrist. Conclusions: Optometrists generally recommended RFs consistent with manufacturers’ recommendations for DD and one-month SH lenses but often recommended longer intervals for two-week SH lenses. Patients were most compliant when wearing DD lenses and least compliant when wearing two-week SH lenses. Communication between the patient and optometrists concerning the risks of non-compliance, or initiating a reminder system might improve compliance.

Patient and practitioner compliance with silicone hydrogel and daily disposable lens replacement in Canada