Observational studyBMC ophthalmology2020
Preloaded vs manually loaded IOL delivery systems in cataract surgery in the largest ambulatory surgery center of northwestern China: an efficiency analysis.
Observational study in BMC ophthalmology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Nano-Indentation to Determine Mechanical Properties of Intraocular Lenses: Evaluating Penetration Depth, Material Stiffness, and Elastic Moduli.Ophthalmology and therapy · 2023Article
- The impact of preloaded intraocular lens implantation system (TECNIS iTec®) in routine cataract surgery in China: a time-motion analysis.BMC ophthalmology · 2023Observational
- Clinical Evaluation of a Hydrophobic Intraocular Lens Using a Preloaded Automated Injector in a Korean Population.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2023Article
- Clinical safety and efficacy of a preloaded monofocal hydrophobic acrylic intraocular lens in a real-world population.BMC ophthalmology · 2021Observational
- Multicenter Evaluation of Time, Operational, and Economic Efficiencies of a New Preloaded Intraocular Lens Delivery System versus Manual Intraocular Lens Delivery.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTo compare the efficiency of preloaded vs manually loaded IOL (P-IOL vs M-IOL, respectively) delivery systems in cataract surgery in the largest ambulatory surgery center of Northwestern China.
methodsA total of 200 cases were included in this prospective, observational study. Time and motion data were collected in a one- or two-operating room (1-OR or 2-OR, respectively) scenario. A model of the efficiency and revenue implications of introducing a preloaded delivery system for IOLs in cataract surgery was used to estimate the changes in cataract throughput and hospital revenue through transitioning from the M-IOL delivery system to the P-IOL system.
resultsIn the 1-OR scenario, the mean total case time was 16.9 min using P-IOL, which was a 7.7% reduction compared with M-IOL (P < 0.01). In the 2-OR scenario, the mean total surgeon time was 10.8 min using P-IOL, which was a 7.8% reduction compared with M-IOL (P < 0.05). By switching from M-IOL to P-IOL, annual throughput will increase by 5.2% (960 cases) in the 1-OR scenario and 7.7% (1440 cases) in the 2-OR scenario, accompany by an increase in revenue of approx. 284,352 USD in the 1-OR scenario and approx. 426,528 USD in the 2-OR scenario.
conclusionThis report is the first of a comparison of two IOL delivery systems in China using different settings in the scenario. IOL delivery with preloaded systems is time saving in both the 1-OR scenario and the 2-OR scenario. Moreover, switching from the M-IOL delivery system to the P-IOL system holds potential to increase cataract throughput and hospital revenue.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.