ArticleEye (London, England)2024
Prospective validation of a virtual post-operative clinic in vitreoretinal surgery.
Article in Eye (London, England), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Timing of macular hole surgery among vitreoretinal surgeons in the UK: A national survey, review of literature and future direction.Eye (London, England) · 2026Review
- Sensitivity and utility of ultra-wide field imaging for the detection of peripheral retinal breaks in a large Irish tertiary referral centre.Eye (London, England) · 2025Article
- Virtual vitreoretinal clinics: a service delivery pathway of the future.International journal of retina and vitreous · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of asynchronous virtual post-operative assessments following vitreoretinal surgery and procedures compared to traditional face-to-face assessments in a high-volume tertiary eye centre.
methodsProspective comparative clinical series study of patients who had undergone vitreoretinal surgery or post-laser retinopexy. Patients received both virtual and face-to-face assessments. The virtual assessment included clinical questions, visual acuity measurement, and virtual retinal imaging using ultra-wide field (UWF) imaging and macular optical coherence tomography (OCT). Face-to-face assessments involved standard clinical examinations.
resultsWe included 142 patients undergoing a variety of vitreoretinal procedures. We showed comparable results between virtual and face-to-face assessments in both, post-operative and post-laser treatments. UWF imaging with macular OCT demonstrated potential for effective virtual post-operative assessment. The virtual assessment has a sensitivity of 91% and specificity of 100% for detecting retinal detachments with 100% specificity and 100% sensitivity for detecting new retinal tears or insufficient laser treatment.
conclusionsThe implementation of asynchronous virtual post-operative assessments following a variety of vitreoretinal procedures is a promising alternative to traditional face-to-face assessments. Virtual assessments using UWF imaging and macular OCT showed high sensitivity and specificity. Virtual post-operative clinics offer the potential to improve patient access and decrease the clinical burden, especially with the continuing evolution of telemedicine technologies and imaging modalities.
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.