Online Questionnaire-Based Study on the Knowledge, Attitude, and Practices of Non-Ophthalmic Physicians-in-Training Regarding Exposure Keratopathy Among Patients Admitted in a Tertiary Referral Hospital

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine the knowledge, attitude, and practices of non-ophthalmic physicians-in-training regarding recognition and prevention of exposure keratopathy among patients admitted in a tertiary referral hospital. METHODS: This study was a single-center cross-sectional study. An anonymous self-administered online questionnaire was distributed among non-ophthalmic physicians-in-training at the Philippine General Hospital (PGH) using convenience and snowball sampling. RESULTS: A total of 77 responses were recorded with a response rate of 37%. The majority of the respondents uniformly reported the absence of an established eye care protocol or policy being implemented for different subsets of patients at risk for developing exposure keratopathy. Ninety-six percent (96%) was aware of exposure keratopathy. The most urgent reason for referral to the ophthalmology service was the presence of whitish of opacity at 46.8%, while the least urgent reason was the presence of eye redness at 36.4%. Only 43% of the patients with incomplete eyelid closure was referred to the ophthalmology service. The most frequently used modality of prophylactic eye protection treatment was eyelid taping (84.4%) followed by lubricants (drops and gels, 79.1%). The most common reason for not referring was the absence of an established protocol on the appropriate indication for referral to the ophthalmology service. CONCLUSION: This study showed that the majority of non-ophthalmic physicians-in-training had adequate knowledge and favorable attitude regarding recognition and prevention of exposure keratopathy among patient admitted at the PGH; however, the absence or the unavailability of an eye care protocol among patients with inadequate eyelid closure in our institution on the prevention of exposure keratopathy and its early treatment and appropriate indications for ophthalmology referral resulted in non-uniformity and varied practice patterns on its management.