Sarah M Nehls1, Shahed Y Ghoghawala2, Frank S Hwang2, Amir A Azari2. 1. From the Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences (Nehls, Ghoghawala, Azari), University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin, and Kresge Eye Institute (Hwang), Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan, USA. Electronic address: nehls@wisc.edu. 2. From the Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences (Nehls, Ghoghawala, Azari), University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin, and Kresge Eye Institute (Hwang), Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate the refractive error quality of life (RQL) improvement, patient satisfaction, and clinical results of laser refractive surgery performed by residents or fellows. SETTING: Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, University of Wisconsin, Madison, USA. DESIGN: Case series. METHODS: This study reviewed the clinical results of consecutive refractive surgery cases performed between March 2010 and February 2012 by ophthalmology residents or fellows. One-year postoperative analysis of the RQL and patient satisfaction in a subgroup of patients was completed using the National Eye Institute Refractive Error Correction Quality of Life-42 instrument (NEI RQL-42), and a comparison with NEI published normative data and post-refractive data was performed. RESULTS: Data were obtained from 138 eyes that had laser in situ keratomileusis and 4 eyes that had photorefractive keratectomy. The 1-year postoperative analysis of the RQL and patient satisfaction was completed in 34 patients. After 6 months postoperatively, the mean uncorrected distance visual acuity was 0.01 logMAR (95% confidence interval [CI], -0.012 to 0.023). The mean postoperative residual refractive error spherical equivalent was -0.20 diopter (D) (95% CI, -0.26 to -0.13). No eye lost corrected distance visual acuity. Equivalent or better satisfaction in the RQL was found in all but 1 of the 13 scale scores of the NEI RQL-42 compared with previously published NEI data. CONCLUSIONS: Laser refractive surgery performed by residents and fellows showed high patient satisfaction and an improved RQL 1-year postoperatively. Clinical outcomes validated the safety and efficacy of refractive surgery performed by surgeons in training. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE: No author has a financial or proprietary interest in any material or method mentioned.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the refractive error quality of life (RQL) improvement, patient satisfaction, and clinical results of laser refractive surgery performed by residents or fellows. SETTING: Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, University of Wisconsin, Madison, USA. DESIGN: Case series. METHODS: This study reviewed the clinical results of consecutive refractive surgery cases performed between March 2010 and February 2012 by ophthalmology residents or fellows. One-year postoperative analysis of the RQL and patient satisfaction in a subgroup of patients was completed using the National Eye Institute Refractive Error Correction Quality of Life-42 instrument (NEI RQL-42), and a comparison with NEI published normative data and post-refractive data was performed. RESULTS: Data were obtained from 138 eyes that had laser in situ keratomileusis and 4 eyes that had photorefractive keratectomy. The 1-year postoperative analysis of the RQL and patient satisfaction was completed in 34 patients. After 6 months postoperatively, the mean uncorrected distance visual acuity was 0.01 logMAR (95% confidence interval [CI], -0.012 to 0.023). The mean postoperative residual refractive error spherical equivalent was -0.20 diopter (D) (95% CI, -0.26 to -0.13). No eye lost corrected distance visual acuity. Equivalent or better satisfaction in the RQL was found in all but 1 of the 13 scale scores of the NEI RQL-42 compared with previously published NEI data. CONCLUSIONS: Laser refractive surgery performed by residents and fellows showed high patient satisfaction and an improved RQL 1-year postoperatively. Clinical outcomes validated the safety and efficacy of refractive surgery performed by surgeons in training. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE: No author has a financial or proprietary interest in any material or method mentioned.