ArticleThe British journal of ophthalmology1997
Conventional routine clinical review may not be necessary after uncomplicated phacoemulsification.
Article in The British journal of ophthalmology, 1997. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Is visual outcome compromised when next day review is omitted after phacoemulsification surgery? A randomised control trial.The British journal of ophthalmology · 2003Trial
- Article
- Incidence of postoperative week 1 management changes after resident-performed phacoemulsification cataract surgery.BMC ophthalmology · 2022Article
- Rethinking Elective Cataract Surgery Diagnostics, Assessments, and Tools after the COVID-19 Pandemic Experience and Beyond: Insights from the EUROCOVCAT Group.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Review
- Do we need day-1 postoperative follow-up after cataract surgery?Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2019Review
- Changing trends in postoperative cataract care: impact of electronic patient records in optometrist-delivered shared care.Irish journal of medical science · 2018Article
- Randomized Crossover Study Showing Nurse-Led Same Day Review Replacing Next Day Review in Uneventful Phacoemulsification to Be Safe and Efficacious.Journal of ophthalmology · 2017Article
- The Effect of Cumulative Dissipated Energy on Changes in Intraocular Pressure After Uncomplicated Cataract Surgery by Phacoemulsification.Journal of glaucoma · 2016Article
- Is day-1 postoperative review necessary after pars plana vitrectomy?Eye (London, England) · 2015Article
- Increased intraocular pressure on the first postoperative day following resident-performed cataract surgery.Eye (London, England) · 2011Article
- Oral versus topical carbonic anhydrase inhibitors in ocular hypertension after scleral tunnel cataract surgery.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2009Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo determine the clinical intervention rate during routine review after uncomplicated phacoemulsification.
methodsA review of case notes in 651 consecutive cases of uncomplicated phacoemulsification from 1994 (< or = 5.5 mm self sealing wound) was performed. The intervention rate at scheduled routine review visits and at unscheduled visits to the eye casualty service in the first 120 postoperative days was recorded. Interventions were defined as departures from predetermined postoperative care protocols.
resultsClinical interventions were reported in 2.8% (95% confidence interval 1.5 to 4.1%) of (n = 1652) routine follow up visits. Many of these interventions were avoidable or trivial; 90% of patients had no postoperative intervention at any visit. 7.3% of patients made unscheduled visits to the emergency service. The intervention rate in this group was 50% (35.9 to 64.1%).
conclusionsThe intervention rate in routine clinical review after uncomplicated modern cataract surgery is low. Alternatives to conventional postoperative review, including shared care with non-ophthalmologists and improved perioperative patient education with an open channel for self referral, should be evaluated.
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.