dc.contributor.author | Bore, Millicent | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2013-10-25T12:30:26Z | |
dc.date.available | 2013-10-25T12:30:26Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2013 | |
dc.identifier.citation | Millicent Bore (2013). Clinical Evaluation Criteria And Approach To Management Of Ocular Allergy By Ophthalmologists In Kenya. Thesis submitted for the degree of master of medicine (ophthalmology) of the University of Nairobi. | en |
dc.identifier.uri | http://erepository.uonbi.ac.ke:8080/xmlui/handle/11295/57909 | |
dc.description.abstract | Background: Despite the high prevalence (20% of the population worldwide) of ocular allergy
(OA), its definition, a standard classification and staging as well as the guidelines to diagnosis
and treatment are not globally accepted. Clinical evaluation criteria would allow appropriated
evaluation of progression, the establishment of algorithms of treatment, as well as objective
assessment for analysis of treatment efficacy.
Aims: To determine the clinical evaluation of OA by ophthalmologists in Kenya and also to
describe their practices regarding the clinical grading and approach to management of ocular
allergy.
Methods: The study was a descriptive (Knowledge, Attitude and Practice) cross-sectional study
carried out in the Republic of Kenya from 1st December 2012- 31st May 2013. All qualified and
practising ophthalmologists in Kenya were included in the study. Primary data was collected
using self-administered questionnaires. Focus Group discussions were used as a secondary data
collection tool for triangulation and to get detailed information on the attitudes and practices of
the ophthalmologists regarding OA. Quantitative data analysis was undertaken using Stata
version 11.0. Qualitative data was imported into NVivo 10 software for coding and data analysed
through content analysis.
Results: A total of 58 ophthalmologists were included in the study (69% response rate). All the
participants reported diagnosing OA based on clinical findings. Majority, 82.8% (48/54 reported
grading ocular allergies with 63.8% (37/58) grading OA according to the level of severity. 50%
(29/58) felt that grading of OA was very important. The rational use of topical steroids was
advised so as to avoid their overuse. Surgical intervention was suggested only in the
management of complications of OA or conditions associated with OA. There is no national
standard treatment guideline for the management of OA. Counselling was seen to form a major
part of the management of a patient with OA though it is inadequate in our setting.
Conclusion: Despite the high number of ophthalmologists reporting grading OA, there is no
standardised grading system followed. Its establishment would allow for better documentation
and assessment of treatment response during patient follow-up. Patient counselling needs to be
emphasized so as to improve compliance to treatment and follow up appointments. There is a
need to come up with a national guideline so as to harmonise the diagnosis, grading and
treatment of ocular allergy. | en |
dc.language.iso | en | en |
dc.publisher | University of Nairobi | en |
dc.title | Clinical Evaluation Criteria And Approach To Management Of Ocular Allergy By Ophthalmologists In Kenya | en |
dc.type | Thesis | en |
dc.description.department | a
Department of Psychiatry, University of Nairobi, ; bDepartment of Mental Health, School of Medicine,
Moi University, Eldoret, Kenya | |
local.publisher | School of Medicine | en |