Intravitreal injections using a novel conjunctival mould: a comparison with a conventional technique.

AIMS The aims were to compare a novel conjunctival mould used to assist the delivery of intravitreal drugs to a conventional technique with respect to patient, surgeon and cost benefit. METHODS A prospective review of 200 intravitreal injections was undertaken, 100 using a 'conventional' freehand technique (group 1) and 100 using a novel conjunctival mould (group 2). Intraoperative visual analogue scale (VAS) pain scores, patient preference, surgeon perception of the ease of insertion of the conjunctival mould were recorded as well as a cost comparison. RESULTS VAS pain score in the conventional group was 2.58 compared to 1.38 in the conjunctival mould group (p<0.01). The surgeon reported the insertion of the conjunctival mould as easy in 89 cases, moderate in 10 cases, and difficult in one case. The cost saving with a conjunctival mould pack compared to a conventional pack was £7.70; an annual saving of £19,250 for the trust. CONCLUSIONS The reduction in the VAS pain score with the conjunctival mould was statistically significant (p<0.01). The surgeons found that the device, which was easy to insert, offered excellent globe stability and a safe, reproducible entry site and angle of needle insertion.