RESUMO
Glaucoma is a chronic progressive optic neuropathy characterized by progressive loss of retinal ganglion cells, which manifests clinically with loss of optic disc neuroretinal rim tissue, defects in the retinal nerve fiber layer, and deficits on functional visual field testing. The goal of glaucoma treatment is to reduce the intraocular pressure to a level that prevents or minimizes the progressive loss of vision. The current standard of management for the newly diagnosed primary open angle glaucoma (PAOG) patient is to start topical medication. Available topical medications include: beta-adrenergic antagonists, alpha-adrenergic agonists, carbonic anhydraze inhibitors, prostaglandin analogues and miotics. In some patients, IOP is not adequately controlled by monotherapy. In those refractory patients, where more efficacy is required, shifting to another medication or adding a second medication is indicated. The complimentary action between two drugs serves as the basis for combination medications. One avenue of delivering a second medication is through a fixed combination medication that has the advantage of providing two medicines within one drop. Bimatoprost/timolol represents a new fixed combination which is clinically and statistically more effective than either of its active constituents for patients with refractory glaucoma. As regard the safety of the combination, there were no signs or symptoms of intolerance and the incidence of conjunctival hyperemia was clinically and statistically significantly less than each of the two components separately. Bimatoprost/timolol fixed combination offers cost and time savings, which may enhance compliance; also reducing the amount of preservative applied to the eye, will improve tolerability and may also favorably improve eventual surgical outcomes in patients who might require filtering procedures.
RESUMO
PURPOSE: To get an idea of whether the issue of what makes people healthier is studied in ophthalmology by determining the proportion of articles dealing with that subject. METHODS: Prospective review of all articles published in 3 consecutive issues of 7 peer-reviewed ophthalmology journals, using a grading system in which A signified an article that clearly dealt with a subject expected to have an impact on health or quality of life, or that considered health or quality of life itself directly; B indicated an article similar to A, but not directly concerned with the issue of health; C signified an article similar to B but more distantly related to health or quality of life; and D was the grade given when there was no relationship at all to health or quality of life. Grading was done independently by 3 graders. A literature review on the subject was also performed. RESULTS: Thirty-three articles received a grade of A, 229 of B, 740 of C, and 81 of D. There were more articles that had no relationship at all to health or quality of life than there were articles dealing directly with those issues. CONCLUSIONS: On the basis of a review of the literature and of over 1000 articles, ophthalmologists do not appear to give much priority to issues of quality of life or health. How validly these conclusions can be generalized to general clinicians is not known.
