ArticleJournal of cataract and refractive surgery2026
Documenting the subjective patient experience of first vs second eye during immediately sequential bilateral cataract surgery.
Article in Journal of cataract and refractive surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Comment on: Optimizing the inter-eye transition to improve immediately sequential bilateral cataract surgery comfort.Journal of cataract and refractive surgery · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo investigate if patients had a subjectively inferior experience during second-eye surgery vs first-eye surgery during immediate sequential bilateral cataract surgery (ISBCS) as both operations were performed within the same surgical visit.
settingMultisurgeon ophthalmic surgical center.
designSurvey-based prospective design.
methodsPatients of the center undergoing routine cataract surgery who enrolled in the study completed a questionnaire immediately after surgery to describe their surgical experience for each eye. Survey questions measured patient pain, discomfort or pressure, comfort, relaxation, estimated length of surgery, and predicted visual outcome.
resultsPatient-reported level of pain during the second-eye surgery was significantly greater than for the first eye ( P < .001). Furthermore, the order of surgery was found to be a strong predictor of patient-reported pain ( P < .001), more so than surgical length ( P < .008), additional anesthesia ( P < .35), patient age ( P < .44), or patient sex ( P < .88). Overall, surgery during the first eye was reported as more comfortable ( P < .001) and shorter in duration ( P < .001), while discomfort and pressure were reported as worse for the second eye ( P < .001).
conclusionsUnderstanding differential experiences between eyes can help surgeons when counselling patients regarding expectations for ISBCS and related visual outcomes.
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.