A systematic review of the recent literature regarding a series of ocular diseases involved in European telemedicine projects was performed based on the PubMed, Google Scholar and Springer databases in June 2017. Literature review returned 44 eligible studies; among them, emergency ophthalmology, diabetic retinopathy, glaucoma, age-related macular disease, cataract and retinopathy of prematurity. The majority of studies indicate teleophthalmology as a valid, reliable and cost-efficient method for care-provision in ophthalmology patients which delivers comparable outcomes to the traditional examination methods.

Background MNREAD is an advanced near-vision acuity chart that has already been translated and validated in Greek language. Considering that no validated Greek digital near-vision test exists, our primary objective was to develop and validate a digital near-vision reading test based on the fundamental properties of the Greek printed MNREAD (MNREAD-GR). Methods This is a prospective, comparative study. A digital near-vision chart was developed (Democritus Digital Acuity Reading Test – DDART) with text size calibration, audio recording for automatic reading timing, as well as automatic calculation of reading acuity (RA), maximum reading speed (MRS), critical print size (CPS) and reading accessibility index (ACC). Normal and low vision subjects participated in the validation process, responding to MNREAD-GR and DDART at the same day, at a 40 cm viewing distance. Differences in all parameters between the charts were compared with t-test and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs). Within 15 days, all participants responded again to DDART in a different set of sentences to assess its test-retest reliability. Results One hundred patients (normal vision group - NVG: 70 patients; low vision group - LVG: 30 patients) responded to both reading tests. Non-significant differences were detected for all parameters between DDART and MNREAD-GR except for MRS and ACC that were significantly higher in MNREAD-GR in NVG (p <  0.01). NVG participants demonstrated sufficient ICCs that ranged from 0.854 to 0.963, while LVG demonstrated ICCs for RA, ACC, MRS and CPS equal to 0.986, 0.894, 0.794 and 0.723, respectively. All parameters calculated with DDART demonstrated excellent test-retest reliability (ICCs: 0.903 – 0.956). Conclusions The proposed reading test presented comparable validity and repeatability to MNREAD-GR suggesting that it can be used both in normal and low vision Greek patients. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04242836. Registered 24 January 2020 – Retrospectively registered.

Purpose Contemporary monovision techniques use premium intraocular lenses (IOLs), either in both eyes or at least in the non-dominant one. Primary objective of this study was to compare the efficacy of premium monovision (implantation of the trifocal diffractive Panoptix IOL in the non-dominant eye and the bifocal hybrid refractive-diffractive Restor IOL in the dominant eye), against bilateral myopic monovision (implantation of the monofocal SN60WF IOL targeting −0.50 D in the dominant eye and −1.25 D myopia in the non-dominant one), hybrid monovision (implantation of Panoptix in the non-dominant eye and SN60WF in the dominant eye) and bilateral trifocal implantation (with bilateral Panoptix implantation). Methods This is a prospective, comparative, clinic-based trial. Cataract patients populated four study groups: Monovision Group (MoG), Multifocal Lens Group (MfG), Hybrid Monovision Group (HmG) and Premium Monovision Group (PmG). Binocular Uncorrected Distance Visual Acuity (UDVA), Uncorrected Reading Acuity and Critical Print Size at 60cm (UIRA, UICPS) and at 40cm (UNRA, UNCPS), contrast sensitivity, vision-related functional impairment, dysphotopsia symptoms and spectacle dependence were evaluated 6 months following the operation of the second eye. A mathematical model was constructed, which calculated the relative efficacy of each surgical intervention. Results A total of 120 participants were recruited and populated equally the study groups. Significant improvement of preoperative UDVA was observed in all study groups. No significant differences could be detected in postoperative UDVA and UIRA (p = 0.24) among study groups, while significant differences were noticed in UICPS (p = 0.04), UNRA (p = 0.02) and UNCPS (p = 0.01). Dysphotopic phenomena (glare and shadows) were significantly more in the MfG arm followed by the PmG group (p = 0.04 and p = 0.02, respectively), while perceived difficulty and spectacle independence rates were significantly better in PmG group. PmG presented the best overall relative efficacy. Conclusion All surgical techniques present satisfactory outcomes. Premium monovision seems to demonstrate the best outcomes. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04618380. Registered 05 November 2020, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04618380 .

A B ST R AC T It is common knowledge that there are patients who have an uncomplicated cataract surgery with an actual improvement of their visual acuity, but they are dissatisfied with their final visual capacity. It is hypothesized that patients' preoperative expectations play a significant role in their postoperative perceptions. A systematic review of the recent literature regarding preoperative expectations of patients before lens extraction surgery and their postoperative perceptions as regards the visual outcome was performed based on the PubMed, Medline, Google Scholar, American Academy of Ophthalmology, Nature and Springer databases in September 2017 and data from 14 descriptive and 7 comparative studies were included in this narrative review. The objective of this review is the determination of the relationship between preoperative expectations and postoperative perception of visual outcome, as well as the investigation of predictors of patient satisfaction by understanding the factors that determine preoperative patient expectations. A considerable number of studies evaluate patient expectations before cataract surgery and compare them with postoperative patient perceptions. In conclusion, the final patient's postoperative perception could be affected both by the actual outcome of the operation and by patient preoperative expectations. Ocular and systemic comorbidity, unrealistic expectations, preoperative spectacle independence, the cost of surgery, and a previous cataract surgery as well as the level of health literacy and age could influence preoperative expectations and predict more accurately patient satisfaction. Taking these factors into consideration could allow surgeons to control the expectations with an extensive preoperative counseling.

Purpose To develop and validate a web-based reading test for normal and low vision patients. Methods This is a prospective, comparative trial. The web-based Democritus Digital Acuity Reading Test (wDDART) was developed. wDDART introduces a series of advanced characteristics (advanced text calibration, computer-vision-based estimation of patient’s distance, and automatic calculation of patient’s reading times) that facilitate the overall examination procedure. wDDART’s reading parameters [reading acuity (RA), maximum reading speed (MRS), critical print size (CPS) and reading accessibility index (ACC)] were compared to the corresponding ones of its conventional Windows-based reading test (DDART) in a sample of normal and low vision participants. wDDART’s test–retest reliability for all reading parameters was evaluated in a 15-day time-window. Results One hundred patients (normal vision group-NVG: 70; low vision group-LVG: 30 patients) responded to DDART and wDDART. Non-significant differences between the two reading tests were found for all parameters in NVG and LVG. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) between the two tests demonstrated good or excellent correlation for RA, MRS, ACC and moderate correlation for CPS. Test–retest reliability was excellent for RA and ACC, while ICCs were 0.715–0.895 for MRS and CPS. Conclusion The wDDART demonstrated sufficient validity and repeatability making it suitable for clinical and research settings. Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier NCT04618224.

BackgroundRecent artificial tear preparations have provided 0.2% concentration of sodium hyaluronate. However, no published data exist on their potential superiority against 0.1% in alleviating dry-eye-disease symptoms in cataract extraction surgery.MethodsA total of 180 patients that underwent cataract extraction surgery were randomly divided into 2 groups according to their postoperative regime: Study group (SG) received fixed combination of tobramycin and dexamethasone (FCTD) quid for 3 weeks, and additionally 0.2% sodium hyaluronate provided in the COMOD® device quid for 6 weeks. Control group (CG) received fixed combination of tobramycin and dexamethasone (FCTD) quid for 3 weeks, and additionally 0.1% sodium hyaluronate provided in the COMOD® device quid for 6 weeks. The following indexes were evaluated at 3 postoperative checkpoints: 1) Surface discomfort index (SDI) which was derived by four direct 10-scale Likert-type questions that were addressed to the patient and pertained to: a) foreign body sensation (FBS), b) blinking discomfort (BD), c) stinging sensation (SS), d) tearing sensation (TS), 2) Tear break-up time (TBUT), 3) Schirmer’s test, 4) Central corneal thickness (CCT), and 4) Central Corneal Sensitivity (CCS).ResultsBoth groups showed reduced CCS values at all postoperative examination points; however, SG participants had significantly better CCS (all p < 0.05). SG had better TBUT than CG at the 3rd (p = 0.03) and 6th examination points (p = 0.04). Moreover, SG had better SDI scores at the 3rd (SDI = 9.26 ± 0.55) and 6th weeks (SDI = 9.47 ± 0.48) vs. CG participants (p = 0.03 and p < 0.01, respectively).ConclusionThe increased 0.2% sodium hyaluronate concentration in the artificial tears provided in the COMOD® device seems to address dry-eye-disease symptoms better in patients who underwent phacoemulsification surgery than the 0.1% concentration.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03705949 Oct 15, 2018, retrospectively registered.

Purpose Primary objective of this study was to identify potential difficulties and/or discomfort when using a facemask. Moreover, to explore the impact of spectacles, contact lenses and visual acuity on the compliance to the facemask directive. Methods This is a prospective study that was conducted at the Department of Ophthalmology, University Hospital of Alexandroupolis, Greece between June 2020 and August 2020. Greek speaking citizens with permanent residency in Greece above 18 years old were included. A custom questionnaire (DeMask-20) was constructed and validated, which pertained to the perceived difficulty and discomfort when using a facemask. It contained 20 items grouped in 8 subscales (driving, near vision, distance vision, ocular discomfort, role limitation, collaboration, dependency on others, emotional stress). Perceived difficulty and discomfort when using a facemask, compliance and correlations of compliance with DeMask-20 scores, demographics, spectacle and/or contact lens use, and visual acuity were evaluated. Results The number of factors was determined through factor analysis. Cronbach’s alpha ranged from 0.716 for the “Role limitation” subscale to 0.938 for “Ocular discomfort” subscale. 1,214 participants (402 men, 812 women, mean age 36.79±12.50 years) completed the DeMask-20 instrument. Mean DeMask-20 score of all study participants was 3.79±0.71. Significant differences in DeMask-20 score were detected in gender (p = 0.009), spectacle use (p = 0.034), contact lens use (p = 0.049), and binocular distance visual acuity (bDVA) (p = 0.001). Mean compliance of all participants was 4.05±0.96. Men, people <50 years and spectacle wearers showed significantly worse compliance (p<0.05). Moreover, professional workers and professional drivers demonstrated significantly better compliance (p = 0.008 and p = 0.047). Significant correlation was detected between compliance and DeMask-20 score (p<0.001, R2 = 0.471). Significant correlations were detected with driving, near vision, distance vision, collaboration, role limitation, emotional stress (p<0.05, R2: 0.386–0.493). Conclusions Factor analysis suggested that the DeMask-20 instrument demonstrates adequate validity, while Cronbach’s alpha indicated sufficient internal consistency of all subscales. This study provided the necessary methods that could evaluate compliance trends and the efficacy of healthcare interventions against COVID-19. Our outcomes suggest that young males who use spectacles should be targeted by Greek Healthcare authorities in order to improve compliance rates.

Purpose: Primary objective of present study is to introduce a contemporary methodology for the lighting standards update addressing both normophakic and pseudophakic patients. Methods: For the sake of our study, we theoretically estimated the intraocular-to-crystalline lens iIluminance ratio (ICIR) and the intraocular lens (IOL) luminous efficiency function V IOL (λ) as a new lighting benefit metric. Then, in a sample of 24 pseudophakic patients (38 eyes) implanted with the trifocal diffractive IOL Panoptix (SG) and in a control group (CG) of 28 normophakic participants (50 eyes), uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) was measured at illuminance of 550lx (optimal UDVA). Following dark adaptation, illuminance was gradually raised from 20 lx until illuminance level that the patient reached his/her optimal UDVA. This measured illuminance at this point was defined as the minimum required illuminance level (MRIL). MRIL and UDVA for illuminance levels between 20 and 550lx in SG were compared with the corresponding values in CG. MRIL calculation allowed the construction of a predictive mathematical model that estimates the impact of environmental lighting on UDVA. Results: ICIR for Panoptix eyes ranged from 54.00% to 55.99%. Both groups had significantly higher UDVA at 550lx compared to 20lx (p < 0.05). CG had significantly higher UDVA than SG at 20lx (7.20 letters, p = 0.045), while no significant difference was detected at 550lx (0.40 letters, p = 0.883). SG required significantly more illuminance than CG to maintain their UDVA (MRIL SG = 191.05lx, MRIL CG = 122lx, p = 0.007). Our predictive model suggests suboptimal UDVA in a series of lighting directives for normophakic and Panoptix eyes. Conclusion: This is the first study to introduce the V IOL (λ) as a new lighting benefit metric and a mathematical model that quantifies the impact of illuminance on UDVA in normophakic and pseudophakic patients. Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT04263636.