TY - JOUR
T1 - [In Press] Knowledge, views and experiences of Australian optometrists in relation to ocular stem cell therapies
AU - Cabrera-Aguas, Maria
AU - Downie, Laura E.
AU - Munsie, Megan M.
AU - Di Girolamo, Nick
AU - O’Connor, Michael
AU - Watson, Stephanie L.
PY - 2022
Y1 - 2022
N2 - Clinical relevance: Findings from this study examining Australian optometrists’ insights into ocular stem cell (SC) therapies have capacity to inform continuing professional development (CPD) about these interventions. Background: This study investigated Australian optometrists’ knowledge, views, experiences, and preferred education sources regarding ocular SC therapies. Methods: An online survey was distributed to optometrists via Optometry Australia, Mivision magazine, professional groups, and social media from August 2020 to March 2021. Data were collected on demographics, and SC knowledge, awareness and experience. Results: Of 81 optometrists who completed the survey, many were metropolitan-based (85%), worked in independent practice (47%), female (56%) and >46 years of age (45%). Approximately one-fifth indicated awareness of ocular SC therapies used in standard practice; one-third had knowledge of SC clinical trials. The most noted SC therapies were for corneal disease in the United States [US] (72%) and Australia (44%). Respondents identified the availability of SC therapies for dry eye disease in Australia and the US (39% and 44% respectively), despite no regulatory-approved treatments for this indication. Clinical trials investigating inherited retinal and corneal diseases in Australia were the most commonly identified (44% and 36%, respectively). Half the respondents felt ‘unsure’ about the quality of evidence for treating eye conditions using SCs. One-fifth indicated concerns with these therapies; of these, most mentioned efficacy (82%), safety (76%) and/or cost (71%). About one-fifth reported being asked for advice about SCs by patients. Two-thirds felt neutral, uncomfortable, or very uncomfortable providing this advice, due to lack of knowledge or the topic being beyond their expertise. Over half (57%) were unsure if clinical management should change if patients received SC therapies. Respondents were receptive to face-to-face education. Conclusion: Some optometrists responding to this survey were aware of ocular SC therapies and/or clinical trials. CPD programs may assist with maintaining currency in this evolving field.
AB - Clinical relevance: Findings from this study examining Australian optometrists’ insights into ocular stem cell (SC) therapies have capacity to inform continuing professional development (CPD) about these interventions. Background: This study investigated Australian optometrists’ knowledge, views, experiences, and preferred education sources regarding ocular SC therapies. Methods: An online survey was distributed to optometrists via Optometry Australia, Mivision magazine, professional groups, and social media from August 2020 to March 2021. Data were collected on demographics, and SC knowledge, awareness and experience. Results: Of 81 optometrists who completed the survey, many were metropolitan-based (85%), worked in independent practice (47%), female (56%) and >46 years of age (45%). Approximately one-fifth indicated awareness of ocular SC therapies used in standard practice; one-third had knowledge of SC clinical trials. The most noted SC therapies were for corneal disease in the United States [US] (72%) and Australia (44%). Respondents identified the availability of SC therapies for dry eye disease in Australia and the US (39% and 44% respectively), despite no regulatory-approved treatments for this indication. Clinical trials investigating inherited retinal and corneal diseases in Australia were the most commonly identified (44% and 36%, respectively). Half the respondents felt ‘unsure’ about the quality of evidence for treating eye conditions using SCs. One-fifth indicated concerns with these therapies; of these, most mentioned efficacy (82%), safety (76%) and/or cost (71%). About one-fifth reported being asked for advice about SCs by patients. Two-thirds felt neutral, uncomfortable, or very uncomfortable providing this advice, due to lack of knowledge or the topic being beyond their expertise. Over half (57%) were unsure if clinical management should change if patients received SC therapies. Respondents were receptive to face-to-face education. Conclusion: Some optometrists responding to this survey were aware of ocular SC therapies and/or clinical trials. CPD programs may assist with maintaining currency in this evolving field.
UR - https://hdl.handle.net/1959.7/uws:69624
U2 - 10.1080/08164622.2022.2102409
DO - 10.1080/08164622.2022.2102409
M3 - Article
SN - 0816-4622
JO - Clinical and Experimental Optometry
JF - Clinical and Experimental Optometry
ER -