O'Connor Davies's Ophthalmic Drugs: Diagnostic and Therapeutic Uses. 4th ed. Graham Hopkins, Richard Pearson. Boston: Butterworth-Heinemann. 1998. Pages: 258. Price: 60. 00. ISBN 0-7506-2966-5. The authors, Graham Hopkins and Richard Pearson, have produced a well-written book. The strong point of the book is its excellent summary paragraphs and relevant clinical data pertaining to the selection and use of ocular diagnostic and therapeutic drugs. Detailed information is not presented on the pharmacological mechanisms governing the action of the drugs described in this book. However, for the optometric practitioner who has previously covered and understands such information, this deficiency will not significantly affect the overall usefulness of the book. The addition of a few well-planned schematic diagrams would help the optometrist to grasp the complex information presented in many of the introductory paragraphs. We have few style criticisms, except that current pharmacological nomenclature uses the term adrenoceptor rather than adrenergic receptor and the term nuclear chain used in the antiviral section is vague. The chapters describing antimicrobials, ophthalmic dosage forms, drug selection and mydriatics, miotics, and cycloplegics are all presented and summarized very well. The anti-inflammatory section is fairly weak; we suggest that a stand-alone chapter dealing with this topic be added. The chapter on antiglaucoma medications is well written, although additional information could be added concerning the newest class of drugs, the prostanoids. Overall, we recommend this book for the optometrist who requires a practical, well-written summary detailing the selection and clinical uses of current ocular diagnostic and therapeutic pharmacological agents. We caution against this book as a reference for detailed information describing the pharmacological mechanisms of ocular DPA and TPA action.
Senchyna et al. (Tue,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: