ArticleDie Ophthalmologie2025
[Cataract surgery in sub-Saharan Africa-Possibilities and limits].
Article in Die Ophthalmologie, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
backgroundThe importance of cataract surgery for the treatment of visual impairment and blindness is as uncontroversial as the cost-effectiveness of the procedure. In terms of quality, there are almost no published case series of cataract operations in sub-Saharan Africa that meet the World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines for postoperative visual acuity.
objectiveThe results after cataract surgery at a publicly accessible tertiary care eye clinic in Rwanda are presented and compared with standardized results from an eye clinic in Germany (AKW).
methodsData from 100 consecutive eyes (manual small incision cataract surgery, MSICS-Rwanda, Phaco-Rwanda, Phaco-AKW) were retrospectively evaluated. The results were compared with each other and with WHO guidelines.
resultsThe number of patients with significantly reduced preoperative visual acuity (visual acuity > 1.3 logMAR) was highest in the MSICS group (MSICS 92%, Phaco-Rwanda 13%, Phaco-AKW 1%). Uncorrected postoperative visual acuity was similar in the Phako-Rwanda and Phako-AKW groups (0.22/0.21 logMAR) and better than MSICS Rwanda (0.33 logMAR). The best corrected postoperative visual acuity was significantly better in the Phako-Rwanda group (0.07 logMAR) than in the two comparison groups Phako-AKW (0.1 logMAR) and MSICS Rwanda (0.15 logMAR). The results of all three groups fulfilled the WHO criteria for postoperative visual acuity.
conclusionDespite poor initial visual acuity, high quality results can be achieved in cataract surgery in a clinical setting in sub-Saharan Africa that are within WHO expectations. A coexistence of MSICS technique and phaco seems reasonable to avoid complications and achieve the best possible results.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40050516What 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.