Biomedical subjects

T Ffytche

Publications and source records attributed to T Ffytche.

10 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2006

Effect of age related macular degeneration on the Eger macular stressometer photostress recovery time.

AIM: To assess the repeatability of Eger macular stressometer (EMS) measures of photostress recovery and determine their association with other measures of visual function. METHODS: EMS photostress recovery time was measured in 90 patients with bilateral exudative age related macular degeneration (AMD), 19 with bilateral atrophic AMD and 47 with both forms of the condition (mean age 79 (SD 13) years). Measurements were made on two occasions separated by 1 year. Intrasession repeatability was assessed by repeating the measures after a 10 minute recovery period at the first visit. Distance visual acuity was measured with a logMAR chart, near visual acuity with a MNRead chart at 25 cm, contrast sensitivity with a Pelli-Robson chart, and the presence of central visual disturbance assessed with an Amsler grid. A questionnaire was used to assess self reported difficulties with glare recovery. RESULTS: The average EMS recovery time was 11.0 (SD 8.9) seconds, decreasing by 1.6 (5.2) seconds on repeated measurement (p<0.05). EMS photostress recovery was not correlated with visual function measures or subjective difficulties with lights (p>0.05). EMS photostress recovery time did not predict those whose vision decreased over the following year compared with those among whom it remained stable. CONCLUSIONS: The EMS test is not a useful tool in determining the severity or progression of AMD.

Adaptation, Ocular↗

PubMed2002

Perceived quality of health care in macular disease: a survey of members of the Macular Disease Society.

AIM: To investigate the experiences of people with macular disease within the British healthcare system. METHOD: The Macular Disease Society Questionnaire, a self completion questionnaire designed to survey the experiences of people with macular disease, was sent to 2000 randomly selected members of the Macular Disease Society. The questionnaire incorporated items about people's experiences with health professionals and the information and support provided by them at the time of diagnosis and thereafter. RESULTS: Over 50% thought their consultant eye specialist was not interested in them as a person and 40% were dissatisfied with their diagnostic consultation. 185 people thought their general practitioner (GP) was well informed about macular disease but twice as many people thought their GP was not well informed. About an equal number of people thought their GP was supportive as those who thought their GP was not supportive. A total of 1247 people were told "nothing can be done to help with your macular disease." A number of negative emotional reactions were experienced by those people as a result, with 61% of them reporting feeling anxious or depressed. Of 282 people experiencing visual hallucinations after diagnosis with macular disease, only 20.9% were offered explanations for them. CONCLUSIONS: Many people with macular disease have unsatisfactory experiences of the healthcare system. Many of the reasons for dissatisfaction could be resolved by healthcare professionals if they were better informed about macular disease and had a better understanding of and empathy with patients' experiences.

Aged↗

PubMed2002

Eye disease in multibacillary leprosy patients at the time of their leprosy diagnosis: findings from the Longitudinal Study of Ocular Leprosy (LOSOL) in India, the Philippines and Ethiopia.

Existing prevalence surveys do not provide adequate information to estimate the magnitude of ocular pathology or vision loss in leprosy patients. We sought to determine the prevalence of ocular findings and related risk factors in leprosy patients at the time of their disease diagnosis. We also sought to determine if there were geographic differences and whether these were due to different demographic characteristics of the populations. The study was undertaken at Schieffelin Leprosy Research & Training Centre (Karigiri, India), Leonard Wood Memorial Leprosy Institute (Cebu, Philippines), and (for 3 years only) ALERT (Addis Ababa, Ethiopia). Newly diagnosed multibacillary (MB) leprosy patients as well as MB cases relapsed after dapsone monotherapy were eligible for enrollment. In each study site, the target population was 300. Standardized examinations were conducted between 1991 and 1998. Patient enrollment included 301 patients in Karigiri, 289 patients in Cebu, and 101 patients in Addis Ababa. The age-adjusted prevalence of blindness (< 6/60 in the better eye) and visual impairment (6/24-6/60) was 2.8% and 5.2%, respectively. Lagophthalmos and leprosy related uveal changes were detected in 3.3% (95% CI 2.0-4.7%) and 4.1% (95% CI 2.4-5.7) of patients, respectively. Overall, 11% (95% CI 8.5-13.2%) of newly enrolled MB patients had potentially blinding leprosy related ocular pathology. Lagophthalmos was associated with increasing age, a short duration between onset and diagnosis, and a previous reaction involving the face. Uveal conditions were associated with increasing age. Overall, eye disease was more common in Indian and Ethiopian patients compared to Filipino patients; however, differences were not significant when controlling for age and clinical (non-ocular) factors. Patients with potentially blinding leprosy related pathology were over three times more likely to have other (hand and foot) disabilities than patients without pathology. Differences in the prevalence of blindness and potentially blinding leprosy related ocular pathology between the sites could be accounted for by the differences in age and other clinical factors of the patients at the different sites. Findings suggest that, even in the face of active leprosy control efforts, around 11% of patients will have potentially blinding pathology at the time of their diagnosis and 2.8% will be blind. If those patients with lagophthalmos or blindness are considered appropriate for referral for more detailed assessment, approximately 4% of newly diagnosed leprosy patients will require active follow-up for eye care; including those with reaction involving the face will result in 9.4% of patients requiring active follow-up. These people are likely to be older, with a reaction involving the face, and/or with other disabilities than those not requiring active follow-up.

Adult↗

PubMed1991