Evidence Hub

Retrospective analysis on the outcomes of contact lens-associated keratitis in a tertiary centre: an evidence-based management protocol to optimise resource allocation

Cai Y, Clancy N, Watson M, Hay G, Angunawela R

The British journal of ophthalmology, 2024

153 participants

Abstract

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Contact lens-associated keratitis (CLAK) is a common sight-threatening complication of contact lens use. Current management protocols in the UK are based on historical practice and necessitate a review for every patient within 48 hours regardless of severity, increasing the treatment burden on a resource-limited healthcare service. Our study aims to identify the different risk factors associated with CLAK, categorise CLAK using a novel grading system and recommend modifications to current management protocols based on the outcomes in the individual subgroups.

METHODS: The retrospective cohort study identified 161 eyes from 153 patients with CLAK from the electronic patient records of a tertiary eye centre between 1 July 2021 and 28 February 2022. Patients were categorised based on epithelial defect size (grade 1: 2.0 mm) and their risk factors, clinical features, treatments and outcomes were analysed.

RESULTS: The most significant risk factors for CLAK include extended-wear contact lens, poor hygiene and prolonged duration of wear. Grades 1 and 2 CLAKs have excellent outcomes following an empirical treatment regime with topical moxifloxacin with 96% discharged within 48 hours and 94.1% discharged in 2 weeks, respectively. Grade 3 CLAKs require prolonged average duration of treatment.

CONCLUSION: We recommend typical grade 1 and 2 CLAKs can be discharged with empirical fluoroquinolone treatment. Grade 3 and all CLAKs with atypical features require monitoring…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 153 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free