History and symptom taking in contact lens fitting and aftercare

Aim: To appraise history and symptom taking for contact lens consultations, to determine current practice and to make recommendations for best practice. Method: The peer reviewed academic literature was reviewed and the results informed a survey completed by 256 eye care practitioners (ECPs) on their current practice and influences. Results: The last eye-test date, last contact lens aftercare (for existing wearers) and reason for visit are key questions for most ECPs. Detailed use of contact lens questions are more commonly applied in aftercares than when refitting patients who have previously discontinued wear (87% vs 56% use), whereas questions on ocular and general history, medication and lifestyle were generally more commonly utilised for new patients than in aftercares (72% vs 50%). 75% of ECPs requested patients bring a list of their medication to appointments. Differential diagnosis questioning was thorough in most ECPs (87% of relevant questions asked). Attempts to optimise compliance included oral instruction (95% always) and written patient instructions (95% at least sometimes). Abbreviations were used by 39% of respondents (26% used ones provided by a professional body). Conclusion: There is scope for more consistency in history and symptom taking for contact lens consultations and recommendations are made.

Functional outcomes in the Cleft Care UK study - Part 3:oral health and audiology

OBJECTIVES: To compare oral health and hearing outcomes from the Clinical Standards Advisory Group (CSAG, 1998) and the Cleft Care UK (CCUK, 2013) studies. SETTING AND SAMPLE POPULATION: Two UK-based cross-sectional studies of 5-year-olds born with non-syndromic unilateral cleft lip and palate undertaken 15 years apart. CSAG children were treated in a dispersed model of care with low-volume operators. CCUK children were treated in a centralized, high volume operator system. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Oral health data were collected using a standardized proforma. Hearing was assessed using pure tone audiometry and middle ear status by otoscopy and tympanometry. ENT and hearing history were collected from medical notes and parental report. RESULTS: Oral health was assessed in 264 of 268 children (98.5%). The mean dmft was 2.3, 48% were caries free, and 44.7% had untreated caries. There was no evidence this had changed since the CSAG survey. Oral hygiene was generally good, 96% were enrolled with a dentist. Audiology was assessed in 227 of 268 children (84.7%). Forty-three per cent of children received at least one set of grommets--a 17.6% reduction compared to CSAG. Abnormal middle ear status was apparent in 50.7% of children. There was no change in hearing levels, but more children with hearing loss were managed with hearing aids. CONCLUSIONS: Outcomes for dental caries and hearing were no better in CCUK than in CSAG, although there was reduced use of grommets and increased use of hearing aids. The service specifications and recommendations should be scrutinized and implemented.