Literature DB >> 33626362

Comparison of Patient-Reported Functional Recovery From Different Types of Ophthalmic Surgery.

Amanda K Bicket1, Aleksandra Mihailovic2, Chengjie Zheng2, Michael Saheb Kashaf2, Niranjani Nagarajan2, Andy S Huang2, Sagar Chapagain2, Joseph Da2, Pradeep Y Ramulu2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To characterize and compare patient-reported recovery of function after cataract or glaucoma surgery using a novel visual analog scale.
DESIGN: Prospective observational cohort study.
METHODS: Daily for 2 weeks and weekly thereafter, patients recovering from trabeculectomy, tube shunt implantation, or cataract extraction (CE) completed a diary-style questionnaire including visual analog scales (VASs; scored 0-100) grading pain and global function. Clinical examination data and medical histories were collected. Generalized estimating equation models evaluated associations between VAS function scores and pain or visual acuity (VA) and compared scores between surgery types.
RESULTS: Among 51 participants followed for 12 weeks, tube shunt placement reduced postoperative day 1 (POD1) function by 47 of 100 points vs CE (P = .006), while trabeculectomy did not reduce POD1 function vs CE (P = .33). After CE, trabeculectomy, and tube shunt placement, average VAS function scores increased 13.94 per week for 2 weeks (P < .001), 4.18 per week for 4 weeks (P = .02), and 7.76 per week for 7 weeks (P < .001), respectively. After those timepoints, there was no further significant change. Beyond 2 weeks, pain levels plateaued, and VA returned to baseline across surgery types; function was inversely related to pain or VA only for the first 2 or 4 weeks, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: Patients recovering from cataract and glaucoma surgery report reduced function in the postoperative period. Tube shunt implantation causes greater morbidity than trabeculectomy, and both are associated with slower improvement than CE. Early postoperative function is associated with VA and pain, but neither fully explains reported impairment. A VAS for function may efficiently capture postoperative recovery.
Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33626362      PMCID: PMC8386507          DOI: 10.1016/j.ajo.2021.02.018

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Ophthalmol        ISSN: 0002-9394            Impact factor:   5.488


  30 in total

1.  Bromfenac ophthalmic solution 0.07% dosed once daily for cataract surgery: results of 2 randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  Thomas R Walters; Damien F Goldberg; James H Peace; James A Gow
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  2013-09-08       Impact factor: 12.079

2.  Assessment of recovery after day surgery using a modified version of quality of recovery-40.

Authors:  E Idvall; K Berg; M Unosson; L Brudin; U Nilsson
Journal:  Acta Anaesthesiol Scand       Date:  2009-05       Impact factor: 2.105

3.  A head-to-head comparison of 16 cataract surgery outcome questionnaires.

Authors:  Colm McAlinden; Vijaya K Gothwal; Jyoti Khadka; Thomas A Wright; Ecosse L Lamoureux; Konrad Pesudovs
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  2011-09-25       Impact factor: 12.079

4.  Catquest questionnaire for use in cataract surgery care: description, validity, and reliability.

Authors:  M Lundström; P Roos; S Jensen; G Fregell
Journal:  J Cataract Refract Surg       Date:  1997-10       Impact factor: 3.351

5.  Quality of Life in the Tube Versus Trabeculectomy Study.

Authors:  Aachal Kotecha; William J Feuer; Keith Barton; Steven J Gedde
Journal:  Am J Ophthalmol       Date:  2017-02-01       Impact factor: 5.258

6.  The visual analogue WOMAC 3.0 scale--internal validity and responsiveness of the VAS version.

Authors:  Paula Kersten; Peter J White; Alan Tennant
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2010-04-30       Impact factor: 2.362

Review 7.  Measurement of quality of recovery using the QoR-40: a quantitative systematic review.

Authors:  B F Gornall; P S Myles; C L Smith; J A Burke; K Leslie; M J Pereira; J E Bost; K B Kluivers; U G Nilsson; Y Tanaka; A Forbes
Journal:  Br J Anaesth       Date:  2013-03-06       Impact factor: 9.166

8.  Responsiveness of NEI VFQ-25 to changes in visual acuity in neovascular AMD: validation studies from two phase 3 clinical trials.

Authors:  Ivan J Suñer; Gregg T Kokame; Elaine Yu; James Ward; Chantal Dolan; Neil M Bressler
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2009-02-28       Impact factor: 4.799

9.  The effect of donor age on penetrating keratoplasty for endothelial disease: graft survival after 10 years in the Cornea Donor Study.

Authors:  Mark J Mannis; Edward J Holland; Robin L Gal; Mariya Dontchev; Craig Kollman; Dan Raghinaru; Steven P Dunn; Robert L Schultze; David D Verdier; Jonathan H Lass; Irving M Raber; Joel Sugar; Mark S Gorovoy; Alan Sugar; R Doyle Stulting; Monty M Montoya; Jeffrey G Penta; Beth Ann Benetz; Roy W Beck
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  2013-12       Impact factor: 12.079

Review 10.  Pain relief that matters to patients: systematic review of empirical studies assessing the minimum clinically important difference in acute pain.

Authors:  Mette Frahm Olsen; Eik Bjerre; Maria Damkjær Hansen; Jørgen Hilden; Nino Emanuel Landler; Britta Tendal; Asbjørn Hróbjartsson
Journal:  BMC Med       Date:  2017-02-20       Impact factor: 8.775

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.