Attitudes of Saudi Arabian Undergraduate Medical Students towards Health Research

Purpose: The Aurolab^® aqueous drainage implant is a low-cost alternative to the Baerveldt glaucoma implant. The aim of this study was to test the hypothesis that the two implants are comparable in terms of surgical success and safety. Methods: We conducted a retrospective case-control study of Aurolab aqueous drainage implant done at our institution from May 2015 and May 2017. Twenty-five consecutive patients who received an Aurolab aqueous drainage implant were matched by age and diagnosis to patients who received a Baerveldt glaucoma implant. Data were collected pre-operative and post-operative visits, including visual acuity and intraocular pressure, number of medications, and complications. Surgical success was defined as intraocular pressure between 5 and 21 mmHg with a minimum 20% reduction from baseline, without loss of light perception or the need for further glaucoma surgery. Cox regression analysis was used to predict factors associated with surgical success. Results: The median (interquartile range, IQR) intraocular pressure at 1 year was 16.0 (8.0) mmHg for the Baerveldt glaucoma implant and 13.0 (8.0) mmHg for the Aurolab aqueous drainage implant, p = 0.38. Success (mean ± SE) at 1 year for the intraocular pressure >21-mmHg failure criterion was 65% ± 15% for the Baerveldt glaucoma implant and 79% ± 11% for the Aurolab aqueous drainage implant (p = 0.80). The frequency of complications listed was similar for the two groups (Fisher’s exact p = 0.71). In the Cox regression, the type of implant was not found to be associated with surgical success. Conclusions: Our preliminary results suggest that the Aurolab aqueous drainage implant is comparable to the Baerveldt glaucoma implant. Further long-term data in a larger population are needed to confirm these findings.

Purpose: Educating patients about their diagnosis and proposed management is integral part of healthcare. Often patient noncompliance is due to a lack of knowledge that could result in irreversible ocular damage. In an era where access to information is virtually unlimited, an understanding of the preferred method of eye care education among patients is required for greater effectiveness in lowering morbidity and mortality of diseases. Subjects and Methods: Patients visiting the ophthalmology clinics of a tertiary hospital in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, were interviewed. This cross-sectional study was conducted between December 2014 and March 2015. A representative sample of 200 patients was enrolled. Close-ended questionnaire covering current and client preferred health promotion methods were used to collect clients' response. Data were analyzed with descriptive statistics. Results: Out of the 200 participants, 110 (55%) were males. The majority (n = 154; 77%) listed an ophthalmologist as their current primary source of information regarding their eye condition. Approximately half of the participants (n = 95; 48%) were keen to be educated regarding the causes of the eye disease. The top four educational methods preferred by patients were one-on-one session with an eye care provider (n = 116; 58%), a group session with an eye care provider (n = 30; 15%), an application on a smartphone (n = 53; 27%), video lectures on eye health and diseases (n = 8; 4%). Conclusion: Majority of patients in ophthalmic care prefer a one-on-one session with an eye care provider for their eye care education.

Type I Boston keratoprosthesis is implanted in patients with severely diseased eyes who are considered poor candidates for traditional keratoplasty. Glaucoma is considered a major visual comorbidity following the implantation of type I Boston keratoprosthesis (KPro). Eyes that receive a Boston KPro are at high risk of progression of pre-existing glaucoma and the development of de novo glaucoma. Both complications can limit best-corrected visual acuity postoperatively. Diagnosis and surveillance for glaucoma in KPro eyes are fundamental to mitigate the risk of visual morbidity. However, managing these patients presents several challenges. The diagnosis of glaucoma after KPro implantation is usually hindered by inaccurate intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements and unreliable ophthalmic investigations such as visual field testing and optical coherence tomography (OCT) of the retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL). In these eyes, medical management of glaucoma with topical medications is usually insufficient, and glaucoma surgery is usually warranted either prior to or during KPro implantation. Options for glaucoma surgery include glaucoma drainage device (GDD) and cyclodestructive procedures. The aim of this article is to highlight the incidence, pathophysiology, diagnosis, and management options of glaucoma in eyes that have undergone type I Boston keratoprosthesis.

Healthcare is a significant contributor to global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and the field of ophthalmology, particularly through high-volume surgeries such as cataract, glaucoma, and retina interventions, has a considerable environmental impact. This review explores the environmental consequences of ophthalmic surgeries, emphasizing recent research on carbon emissions, waste production, and resource use. It also examines current sustainable practices and suggests evidence-based recommendations to mitigate the carbon footprint of ophthalmic care. Sustainability has become a critical priority in healthcare, particularly in high-volume specialties like ophthalmology, which generate significant environmental impact through resource-intensive surgical procedures. This review examines the carbon footprint of key ophthalmic surgeries—cataract, glaucoma, and retina—and identifies primary sources of emissions, including single-use disposables, energy consumption, and the use of potent greenhouse gases such as sulfur hexafluoride (SF₆) in retina surgery. Strategies to mitigate these impacts are proposed, focusing on transitioning to reusable instruments and supplies, reducing pharmaceutical waste, optimizing energy use in surgical facilities, and considering air tamponade as a viable alternative to high global warming potential (GWP) gases in retina procedures. Case studies, such as the sustainable practices at Aravind Eye Hospital, illustrate the feasibility of combining high-quality ophthalmic care with environmental responsibility. By adopting evidence-based solutions, the field of ophthalmology can significantly reduce its ecological footprint, aligning with global sustainability initiatives while maintaining patient safety and surgical efficacy.

Purpose: Preventive measures to mitigate the spread of coronavirus, minimized workload on health-care systems and redirected resources to COVID-19 patients resulting in a reduction of elective procedures such as cataract surgery. We report the changes in monthly cataract surgery rate and its associated determinants at a tertiary eye hospital during different periods of the pandemic. Studying the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on cataract surgery rate will help health-care policymakers to better understand the barriers to overcome the expected surgical backlog. Methods: A retrospective review of medical records was performed for cataract surgeries from November 2018 to January 2022, five thousand and ninety-two eyes that underwent cataract surgery during different phases of the COVID-19 pandemic were included. The monthly cataract surgery rate (MCSR) was calculated and compared before (Phase 1), during (Phase 2) and after the COVID-19 pandemic (Phase 3 and 4). Changes in monthly cataract surgery rate during and after the pandemic were presented as ratios and compared pre- to post-pandemic levels to evaluate the impact of different determinants. Results: Of 9701 cataract patients, 5092 (52.5%) were operated in P1, 71 (0.73%) in P2, 116 (1.2%) in P3 and 4422 (45.6%) in P4. The MCSR varied significantly based on the degree of visual impairment in the operated and fellow eyes, and by the type of operating surgeon (P < 0.05). Age, gender, laterality, and place of residence were not significantly different throughout the study period. During phase 1135 (2.6%) eyes had rupture of the posterior capsule (PCR), while 6 eyes (8.4%) had PCR in phase 2. Conclusion: The monthly cataract surgery rate declined during the pandemic and has not recovered to pre-pandemic levels. This should alert the key stakeholders to address the identified barriers to surpassing the baseline monthly surgical rate as this is crucial to eliminate the surgical backlog after the pandemic.