ArticleFrontiers in ophthalmology2025
Assessment of cataract surgery outcomes at Jimma Medical Center, Jimma, Southwest Ethiopia.
Article in Frontiers in ophthalmology, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Globally, cataract is the leading cause of blindness accounting for 51% and affecting approximately 39 million people. Visual rehabilitation is achieved through sight-restoring surgery. Objectives: The study aimed to assess the outcomes of cataract surgery that were performed by senior ophthalmologists and residents at Jimma Medical Center (JMC), Jimma, Southwest Ethiopia. Methods: An institutional-based cross-sectional study was conducted among 341 patients who underwent cataract surgery. The surgery outcomes were assessed using the Physician Quality Reporting System (PQRS) and WHO guidelines. The primary outcomes of the study were post-surgical visual acuity tests, complications within 30 days following surgery, and any additional procedures required. Finally, the outcome of cataract surgery was rated as good, borderline, or poor based on the post-surgical visual acuity test results according to WHO guidelines, and as good vision, no/mild, moderate, or severe visual impairment (VI), and blindness according to PQRS. Results: Out of the 341 cataract surgeries performed, 171 were operated by residents and 170 by senior ophthalmologists, respectively. The overall prevalence of cataract surgery outcomes based on PQRS guidelines for post-operative visual acuity tests showed good vision in 187 cases (54.8%), no/mild VI in 64 cases (18.8%), moderate VI in 46 cases (13.5%), severe VI in 12 cases (3.5%), and blindness in 32 (9.1%). According to the WHO classification, 253 cases (74.2%) had a good outcome, while 45 cases (13.25%) had a borderline outcome and 43 cases (12.6%) had a poor outcome. The prevalence of cataract surgery outcomes varied among healthcare professionals performing the surgeries. Less than 9.7% of patients required re-surgery within the first month of operation due to complications. Conclusion: In summary, 54.8% of the patients achieved good vision with an acuity test result of 6/12 or better. This finding meets the minimum Medicare PQRS measure value of ≥50% for both professionals. The overall outcome of cataract surgery showed a statistically significant difference between residents and senior ophthalmologists who performed the procedures.
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.