What should you add to your practice for dry eye? A Survey on perceived value of various dry eye diagnostic and treatment devices and procedures

Background: Dry eye management among eye care providers varies greatly based upon the technology available to the clinician. The newest technology available for diagnosing and managing dry eye disease is can be very costly. There are also many different brands of diagnostic and treatment equipment available. Eye care professionals have to determine what device they would like to add to their office, as well as which brand they think will work the best. The purpose ofthis study is to determine what in office equipment and procedures eye care providers think are most rewarding financially, as well as clinically. Methods: An electronic survey was distributed asking clinicians what types ofin office devices and procedures they use to treat dry eye. The eye care clinicians were then asked to rate the financial value ofthese devices to their practice on a scale ofone to five ( one being low and five being high). There was also an "NIA" option available as well ifthe clinician did not know, or ifthat procedure or device was not billable or did not contribute to the financial value ofthe practice. The same was asked about the clinical value ofthe instrument. The survey was sent out through many different electronic routes. The Michigan College ofOptometry Alumni were contacted through email, the individual state optometric societies throughout the United States were sent an email survey invitation, and the survey was posted on two Facebook social media pages (ODs on Facebook and OSD Docs). Results: The main categories in this survey were Meibomian gland analysis, Meibomian gland heating units, tear analysis, and lid hygiene. Out ofthe devices listed, eye care providers may benefit more from adding the Oculus Keratograph 5M, Tear Science Lipiflow, or lntensed Pulsed Light. Clinicians may not benefit as much from adding the Rysurg BlephEx or the TearLab Osmolarity Test. Conclusions: Adding another device or procedure to an eye care clinic can be expensive, and can take time to implement. It is important for a provider to know what works and what doesn't. This survey provides the perceived clinical and financial value of various testing and treatment devices and for dry eye. Based on the assigned values ofthe eye care clininicians that responded to this survey, the Oculus Keratograph 5M, Tear Science Lipiflow, and Intensed Pulsed Light therapy seem clinically and financially beneficial. However the Rysurg BlephEx and TearLab Osmolarity Test did not rate as well. The Lipiflow also was the most desired instrument that clinicians listed to add to their current practice.