ABSTRACT Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare the white-to-white distance measurements of two devices (IOL Master 500 and Atlas corneal topographer) commonly used in clinical practice to determine if they were interchangeable. Providing information on instrument interchangeability could eliminate several unnecessary tests and consequently reduce the economic burden for the patient and society. Methods: In this prospective, comparative case series, the white-to-white distance was measured by independent examiners using the Atlas topographer (Carl Zeiss Meditec) and the IOL Master 500 (Carl Zeiss Meditec). One eye each of 184 patients was tested. Statistical analyses were performed using a paired t-test, Pearson correlation analysis, and Bland-Altman analysis to compare the measurement methods. Results: The mean white-to-white distance measurements with the Atlas topographer and the IOL Master 500 were 12.20 ± 0.44 mm and 12.12 ± 0.41 mm, respectively (p<0.001). The mean white-to-white difference between the two devices was 0.07 mm (95% confidence interval of mean difference: 0.04-0.11 mm). The Pearson correlation coefficient between the two devices was 0.85 (p<0.0001). The 95% limits of agreement between the two devices were -0.38 mm to 0.53 mm. Conclusions: The Atlas topographer and IOL Master 500 can be used interchangeably with respect to white-to-white distance measurements, as the range of differences is unlikely to affect clinical practice and decision making.

RESUMO Objetivo: O objetivo deste estudo é comparar as medições de diâmetro corneano de dois dispositivos normalmente utilizados na prática clínica (IOL Master 500 e Atlas topógrafo corneal) para ver se são permutáveis. O fornecimento de informações sobre a permutabilidade de instrumentos poderia eliminar vários testes desnecessários e, consequentemente, reduzir a carga econômica para o paciente e para a sociedade. Métodos: Nesta série de casos prospectivos e comparativos, a distância do diâmetro corneano foi medida por examinadores independentes utilizando o Topógrafo Atlas (Carl Zeiss Meditec) e o IOL Master 500 (Carl Zeiss Meditec), em um olho de 184 pacientes. A análise estatística foi realizada utilizando o teste t pareado, a correlação Pearson e a análise Bland-Altman para comparar os métodos de medição. Resultados: As medições médias da distância do diâmetro corneano com o topógrafo Atlas e o IOL Master 500 foram de 12,20 ± 0,44 mm e 12,12 ± 0,41 mm, respectivamente (p<0,001). A diferença média de WTW entre os dois dispositivos foi de 0,07 mm (intervalo de confiança de 95% da diferença média: 0,04 - 0,11 mm). O coeficiente de correlação Pearson entre os dois dispositivos foi de 0,85, p<0,0001. Os limites de concordância de 95% entre os dois dispositivos foram de -0,38 mm a 0,53 mm. Conclusões: O Atlas topographer e o IOL Master 500 podem ser utilizados permutavelmente em relação à medição do diâmetro corneano, uma vez que a gama de diferenças encontradas é pouco susceptível de afetar a prática clínica e a tomada de decisões.

RESUMO Objetivo: O objetivo deste estudo é comparar as medições de diâmetro corneano de dois dispositivos normalmente utilizados na prática clínica (IOL Master 500 e Atlas topógrafo corneal) para ver se são permutáveis. O fornecimento de informações sobre a permutabilidade de instrumentos poderia eliminar vários testes desnecessários e, consequentemente, reduzir a carga econômica para o paciente e para a sociedade. Métodos: Nesta série de casos prospectivos e comparativos, a distância do diâmetro corneano foi medida por examinadores independentes utilizando o Topógrafo Atlas (Carl Zeiss Meditec) e o IOL Master 500 (Carl Zeiss Meditec), em um olho de 184 pacientes. A análise estatística foi realizada utilizando o teste t pareado, a correlação Pearson e a análise Bland-Altman para comparar os métodos de medição. Resultados: As medições médias da distância do diâmetro corneano com o topógrafo Atlas e o IOL Master 500 foram de 12,20 ± 0,44 mm e 12,12 ± 0,41 mm, respectivamente (p<0,001). A diferença média de WTW entre os dois dispositivos foi de 0,07 mm (intervalo de confiança de 95% da diferença média: 0,04 - 0,11 mm). O coeficiente de correlação Pearson entre os dois dispositivos foi de 0,85, p<0,0001. Os limites de concordância de 95% entre os dois dispositivos foram de -0,38 mm a 0,53 mm. Conclusões: O Atlas topographer e o IOL Master 500 podem ser utilizados permutavelmente em relação à medição do diâmetro corneano, uma vez que a gama de diferenças encontradas é pouco susceptível de afetar a prática clínica e a tomada de decisões.

ABSTRACT Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare the white-to-white distance measurements of two devices (IOL Master 500 and Atlas corneal topographer) commonly used in clinical practice to determine if they were interchangeable. Providing information on instrument interchangeability could eliminate several unnecessary tests and consequently reduce the economic burden for the patient and society. Methods: In this prospective, comparative case series, the white-to-white distance was measured by independent examiners using the Atlas topographer (Carl Zeiss Meditec) and the IOL Master 500 (Carl Zeiss Meditec). One eye each of 184 patients was tested. Statistical analyses were performed using a paired t-test, Pearson correlation analysis, and Bland-Altman analysis to compare the measurement methods. Results: The mean white-to-white distance measurements with the Atlas topographer and the IOL Master 500 were 12.20 ± 0.44 mm and 12.12 ± 0.41 mm, respectively (p<0.001). The mean white-to-white difference between the two devices was 0.07 mm (95% confidence interval of mean difference: 0.04-0.11 mm). The Pearson correlation coefficient between the two devices was 0.85 (p<0.0001). The 95% limits of agreement between the two devices were -0.38 mm to 0.53 mm. Conclusions: The Atlas topographer and IOL Master 500 can be used interchangeably with respect to white-to-white distance measurements, as the range of differences is unlikely to affect clinical practice and decision making.

RESUMO Objetivo: Avaliar a técnica de instilação de colírio em portadores de glaucoma e identificar fatores independentes que pode influenciar o desempenho. Métodos: Neste estudo transversal 71 pacientes consecutivos com glaucoma ou hipertensão ocular que auto instilam seus colírios há pelo menos 6 meses, foram avaliados. Todos os pacientes instilaram um colírio lubrificante no olho de pior visão utilizando a mesma técnica de instilação de colírio que utilizam rotineiramente em casa. Foram avaliados parâmetros como: idade, número de anos em tratamento com colírios hipotensores oculares, tempo gasto para instilação da primeira gota, número de gotas instiladas, localização correta do colírio, contato do frasco com o olho, fechamento de pálpebras ou oclusão do ponto lacrimal e assepsia das mãos. Resultados: A idade média dos pacientes foi de 66 ± 10,8 anos. Os pacientes esta vam em tratamento com colírios hipotensores oculares por, em média, 11,3 ± 7,3 anos (variando de 2 a 35 anos). Apenas 28% dos pacientes foram capazes de instilar corretamente o colírio (instilação de 1 gota em saco conjuntival sem contato com a ponta do frasco). Contato da ponta do frasco com o olho ou tecido periocular ocorreu em 62% dos pacientes. Em 49% dos casos, o colírio caiu nas pálpebras ou fora do saco lacrimal na primeira tentativa. Duas ou mais gotas foram instiladas por 27% dos pacientes. Conclusão: A maioria dos pacientes com glaucoma é incapaz de instilar o colírio corretamente. A idade é um fator independente que influencia o desempenho da instilação de colírio.

ABSTRACT Purpose: To study the technique of eye drop instillation in glaucoma patients and identify independent factors that may influence their performance. Methods: In this cross-sectional study, 71 consecutive patients with glaucoma or ocular hypertension, self-administering topical anti-glaucoma medications for ≥6 months were evaluated. All patients instilled a tear substitute into the eye with the worst eyesight using the technique normally used at home. The following parameters were evaluated: age, number of years receiving treatment with ocular hypotensive eye drops, time spent to instill the first drop, number of drops instilled, correct location of the eye drops, contact of the bottle with the eye, closing of the eyelids or occlusion of the tear punctum, and asepsis of the hands. Results: The mean age of the patients was 66 ± 10.8 years, and patients were on ocular hypotensive drugs for 11.3 ± 7.3 (range, 2-35) years. Only 28% of the patients were able to correctly instill the eye drops (squeeze out 1 drop and instill it into the conjunctival sac without bottle tip contact). Touching the tip of the bottle to the globe or periocular tissue occurred in 62% of the patients. In 49% of the patients, the eye drops fell on the eyelids or cheek. Two or more drops were squeezed by 27% of the patients. Conclusions: The majority of glaucoma patients were unable to correctly instill eye drops. Age was an independent factor associated with eye drop instillation performance.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the frequency and characteristics of ocular manifestations in outpatients with systemic sclerosis. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, 45 patients with systemic sclerosis were enrolled. Data regarding demographics, disease duration and subtype, age at diagnosis, nailfold capillaroscopic pattern and autoantibody profile were collected, and a full ophthalmic examination was conducted. Parametric (Student's t-test) and nonparametric (Mann-Whitney U test) tests were used to compare continuous variables. Fisher's exact test was used to compare categorical data. P values < 0.05 were considered significant. RESULTS: Twenty-three subjects (51.1%) had eyelid skin changes; 22 (48.9%) had keratoconjunctivitis sicca, 19 (42.2%) had cataracts, 13 (28.9%) had retinal microvascular abnormalities and 6 (13.3%) had glaucoma. Eyelid skin changes were more frequent in patients with the diffuse subtype of systemic sclerosis and were associated with a younger age and an earlier age at diagnosis. Cataracts were presumed to be age-related and secondary to corticosteroid treatment. There was no association between demographic, clinical or serological data and keratoconjunctivitis sicca. The retinal microvascular abnormalities were indistinguishable from those related to systemic hypertension and were associated with an older age and a severe capillaroscopic pattern. CONCLUSIONS: Eyelid skin abnormalities and keratoconjunctivitis sicca were the most common ocular findings related to systemic sclerosis. Some demographic and clinical data were associated with some ophthalmic features and not with others, showing that the ocular manifestations of systemic sclerosis are characterized by heterogeneity and reflect the differences in the implicated pathophysiological mechanisms.