| Literature DB >> 30473599 |
Loka Thangamathesvaran1, Elliot Crane2, Kunjal Modi3, Albert S Khouri4.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Glaucoma is a chronic optic neuropathy with increasing global prevalence, necessitating trainees in ophthalmology to be well-trained in the surgical modalities used to manage glaucoma. It is also important to not compromise patient safety and treatment efficacy for training and education. The purpose of our analysis is to compare postoperative outcomes of resident versus (vs.) attending performed tube shunt surgeries (TS).Entities:
Keywords: Educational training; Glaucoma; Resident versus attending; Tube shunt surgery; Cohort study
Year: 2018 PMID: 30473599 PMCID: PMC6236119 DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10008-1245
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Curr Glaucoma Pract ISSN: 0974-0333
Table 1: Patient pre-operative demographic comparison between the resident and attending cases
| 60 | 60 | ||||||
| Left | 31 | 31 | |||||
| Right | 29 | 29 | |||||
| Male | 28 | 34 | |||||
| Female | 32 | 25 | |||||
| p-value | |||||||
| Mean ± SD | 63.91 ± 18.32 | 58.11 ± 16.35 | 0.072 | ||||
| Hypertension | 13 | 13 | |||||
| Diabetes | 4 | 5 | |||||
| Both | 17 | 12 | |||||
| None | 26 | 30 | |||||
| X2 | |||||||
| Uveitic | 15 | 17 | 0.67 | ||||
| POAG | 29 | 25 | 0.44 | ||||
| CACG | 4 | 7 | |||||
| Traumatic | 5 | 3 | |||||
| Neovascular | 5 | 5 | |||||
| Exfoliation | 1 | 0 | |||||
| Steroid induced | 0 | 1 | |||||
| Congenital | 1 | 2 | |||||
| p-value | |||||||
| Mean ± SD | 0.84 ± 0.16 | 0.85 ± 0.16 | 0.482 | ||||
| Phakic | 21 | 33 | X2 | ||||
| Pseudophakic | 39 | 24 | 0.03 | ||||
| Aphakic | 0 | 3 | 0.01 | ||||
| Laser | 4 | 5 | |||||
| trabeculoplasty | |||||||
| Peripheral | 16 | 18 | |||||
| iridotomy | |||||||
| Cyclophotoco-agulation | 0 | 6 | |||||
| p-value | |||||||
| Mean defect (MD) | |||||||
| Mean ± SD | –15.23 ± 10.04 | –20.68 ± 10.27 | 0.052 | ||||
| Pattern standard | |||||||
| deviation (PSD) | |||||||
| Mean ± SD | 7.30 ± 3.83 | 6.42 ± 3.50 | 0.213 | ||||
| p-value | |||||||
| Mean ± SD | 30.19 ± 9.00 | 30.37 ± 7.96 | 0.45 | ||||
| p-value | |||||||
| Mean ± SD | 3.08 ± 1.16 | 3.48 ± 1.38 | 0.09 | ||||
| p-value | |||||||
| Log MAR | |||||||
| Mean ± SD | 0.87 ± 0.82 | 1.23 ± 0.93 | 0.21 | ||||
| Snellan conversion | 20/148 | 20/340 |
avalues as defined by FL < 30%, FN/FP < 30%*
Table 2: Patient intraoperative comparison between resident and attending cases
| Ahmed | 34 | 52 | |||||
| Baerveldt | 24 | 7 | |||||
| Molteno | 1 | 1 | |||||
| Not specified | 1 | 0 | |||||
| Superotemporal | 57 | 58 | |||||
| Superonasal | 1 | 2 | |||||
| Inferonasal | 2 | 0 | |||||
| Intraoperative time (first incision to closure in minutes) | 50 ± 9.07 | 55 ± 15.95 | 0.02 |
*Statistically significant difference from baseline
Table 3: Comparisons of attending and resident postoperative outcomes
| Attending | 30.19 ± 9.00 | 20.69 ± 10.23* | 16.93 ± 6.38* | 15.64 ± 6.04* | 15.06 ± 3.55* | ||||||
| Resident | 30.37 ± 7.96 | 20.61 ± 10.46* | 19.89 ± 8.88* | 16.37 ± 5.98* | 15.21 ± 5.17* | ||||||
| p-value | 0.45 | 0.32 | 0.02 | 0.31 | 0.422 | ||||||
| Attending | 0.87 ± 0.82 | 1.08 ± 0.93 | 0.98 ± 0.92 | 1.06 ± 0.89 | 0.96 ± 0.86 | ||||||
| Resident | 1.23 ± 0.93 | 1.29 ± 0.95 | 1.16 ± 0.95 | 1.17 ± 1.03 | 1.06 ± 0.94 | ||||||
| p value | 0.21 | 0.12 | 0.17 | 0.29 | 0.29 | ||||||
| Attending | 9.28 ± 11.78 | 13.06 ± 9.23 | 14.14 ± 10.17 | 14.39 ± 9.79 | |||||||
| Resident | 8.79 ± 10.36 | 11.31±11.74 | 14.65 ± 9.45 | 14.88 ± 8.76 | |||||||
| p-value | 0.44 | 0.30 | 0.28 | 0.31 | |||||||
| Attending | 0.27 ± 0.32 | 0.40 ± 0.23 | 0.44 ± 0.25 | 0.43 ± 0.21 | |||||||
| Resident | 0.28 ± 0.36 | 0.32 ± 0.36 | 0.44 ± 0.24 | 0.46 ± 0.23 | |||||||
| p-value | 0.46 | 0.08 | 0.50 | 0.23 | |||||||
| Attending | 3.08 ± 1.16 | 0.98 ± 1.21* | 1.38 ± 1.14* | 1.39±1.25* | 1.53 ± 1.14* | ||||||
| Resident | 3.45 ± 1.41 | 1.00 ± 1.33* | 1.82 ± 1.45* | 1.82±1.36* | 1.86 ± 1.30* | ||||||
| p-value | 0.06 | 0.47 | 0.04 | 0.05 | 0.09 |
*Statistically significant difference from baseline
Fig.1:Kaplan-Meier curve for criteria 1: 20% reduction in IOP and absolute IOP ≤ 21 mm Hg (p = 0.325)
Fig. 2:Kaplan-Meier curve for criteria 2: 30% reduction in IOP and absolute IOP ≤ 18 mm Hg (p = 0.401)
Table 4: Comparison of cases meeting failure criteria
| NLP | 2 | 1 | 1.00 | ||||
| Resurgery | 10 | 5 | 0.27 | ||||
| Hypotony | 3 | 1 | 0.62 |
Table 5: Postoperative complication comparisons
| Corneal edema | 16 | 10 | 0.27 | ||||
| Tube removal | 1 | 1 | 1.00 | ||||
| Tube revision | 4 | 3 | 1.00 | ||||
| exposure | 10 | 10 | 1.00 | ||||
| Hyphema | 10 | 6 | 0.42 | ||||
| Conjunctival | 2 | 5 | 0.44 | ||||
| dehiscence | |||||||
| Corneal haze | 9 | 4 | 0.24 | ||||
| Endophthalmitis | 1 | 2 | 1.00 |