Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35115891›Full record

ArticleThe Malaysian journal of medical sciences : MJMS2021

Refractive Outcome of Phacoemulsification Cataract Surgery in Rural Sabah Using Immersion Biometry.

Jo Anne Sit, Sivaraj Raman, Arifah Nur Yahya

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Malaysian journal of medical sciences : MJMS, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Observational
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Jo Anne SitOphthalmology Department, Hospital Keningau, Keningau, Sabah, Malaysia.
Sivaraj RamanPharmacy Department, Hospital Keningau, Keningau, Sabah, Malaysia.
Arifah Nur YahyaOphthalmology Department, Hospital Queen Elizabeth, Kota Kinabalu, Sabah, Malaysia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundA good refractive outcome after cataract surgery indicates adequate clinical service provision. Precise immersion biometry is critical to achieve the desired refractive outcome. While the immersion biometry results are good in the tertiary settings, it is of interest to explore the refractive outcome of cataract surgeries in a rural facility using the same technique.

methodsA retrospective cross-sectional review was conducted on medical records of all cataract surgeries carried out in Hospital Keningau, Sabah. This study used all patients' medical records who had been assessed using immersion biometry pre-operatively, underwent phacoemulsification cataract surgery besides attending a post-operative refraction session within 90 days from the operation date. Clinical details were recorded in the form of standard proformas and analysed. The refractive outcome was evaluated using spherical equivalence (SE) and best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA). The percentage of cases with post-operative SE within ±1.00 diopter (D) and BCVA of '6/12 or better' were determined. The association between demographic factors and surgical-related factors with post-operative SE was evaluated using Fisher's exact test.

resultsOf 140 cataract surgeries, 113 fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The average patient age was 66.3 (SD = 10.9) years old. The technique was proven to replicate a good outcome of 84.1% of cases with post-operative SE within ±1.00 D while 90.3% of the cases achieved BCVA of '6/12 or better

conclusionThe study proves the reproducibility of good refractive outcome in a rural facility using immersion biometry. The findings provide a benchmark for performance surveillance in rural facilities.

Indexed as

biometrycataractrefractive errorruralSabah

Identifiers

PMID35115891
PMCPMC8793979

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.