ArticleAdvances in ophthalmology practice and research
The relationship between patient satisfaction and visual and optical outcome after bilateral implantation of an extended depth of focus multifocal intraocular lens.
Article in Advances in ophthalmology practice and research. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- An Evidence-Based Pathway from Functional Classification to Intraocular Lens Specialization: A Case Example Applying the PECO Framework.Ophthalmology and therapy · 2026Review
- Article
- The Postoperative Visual and Refractive Outcomes of Trifocal and Extended Depth-of-Focus Intraocular Lenses in Patients with Different Biometric Characteristics.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Effects of clear corneal incision location and morphology on corneal surgically induced astigmatism and higher-order aberrations after ICL V4c implantation.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Article
- Comparative Evaluation of Visual Performance and Patient Satisfaction following Cataract Surgery: A Retrospective Analysis of an Extended Depth-of-Focus Intraocular Lens and a Diffractive Multifocal Lens with Extended Depth of Focus.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Assessing Visual Outcomes: A Comparative Study of US-FDA Premarket Approval Data for Multifocal and EDOF Lens Implants in Cataract Surgery.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Agreement between Two Devices for Measuring Pupil Diameter in Patients Implanted with Multifocal Intraocular Lenses.Vision (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Light scattering from a diffractive-refractive intraocular lens: a goniometer-based approach for individual zone assessment.Biomedical optics express · 2022Article
- Grand Challenges and Opportunities in Surgical Ophthalmology: Together for a Shared Future.Frontiers in ophthalmology · 2022Article
- Early postoperative changes in corneal densitometry after SMILE with 120-μm and 130-μm cap thickness: a comparative study.Advances in ophthalmology practice and researchArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To evaluate patient satisfaction after implantation of the Tecnis Symfony multifocal intraocular lens (MIOL). Methods: 120 eyes of 60 subjects with senile cataract were bilaterally implanted with the Tecnis Symfony IOL. Follow-up examination was performed 6 months postoperatively. Main outcome measures included uncorrected and corrected distance and near visual acuity, manifest refraction, and visual quality metrics. According to their subjective symptoms patient were divided in two groups: satisfied and unsatisfied. Results: Uncorrected intermediate (0.15 ± 0.11 vs 0.18 ± 0.01, Conclusions: Uncorrected cylindrical error, poor reading quality, larger pupil and halos seem to be the most disturbing factors for patients implanted with the Tecnis Symfony IOL.
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.