Time-trend and variations in the proportion of second-eye cataract surgery

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Despite recommendations for greater use of second-eye cataract surgery and the bilateral progression of the disease, there is a substantial proportion of unmet need for this treatment. Few studies have explored the factors associated with second-eye cataract surgery utilisation. The objective of our study was to estimate the proportion of second-eye cataract surgery, evaluate its time-trend, and explore differences in utilisation by patients' gender, age, and region of residence.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>All senile cataract surgeries performed between 1999 and 2002 in the public health system of Catalonia (Spain) were obtained from the Minimum Data Set. The proportion of second-eye surgery from November 2000 to December 2002 was calculated. The time-trend of this proportion was characterised through linear regression models with the logarithmic transformation of time.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The proportion of second-eye surgery was 30.0% and showed an increasing trend from 24.8% (95% Confidence Interval [CI] 21.6; 26.1) in November 2000 to 31.8% (95% CI 31.4; 33.6) in December 2002. This proportion was 1.9% (95% CI 0.9; 2.9) higher in women (p < 0.001) and held constant across time. Male patients aged less than 60 had the lowest proportion (22.6%; 95% CI 22.4; 22.9) and females between 70 and 79 had the highest proportion (27.4%; 95% CI 26.9; 27.9). The time-trend for the proportion of second-eye surgery in those aged over 80 years was greater than for younger ages, showing an increase of 9% at the end of the period for both males and females. Variations between regions decreased over time because regions with the lowest initial proportions of second-eye surgery (approximately 17%) showed a greater increase over the study period.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>We predict greater utilization of second-eye surgery in patients aged 70 to 79 years and in women. A greater increase in the utilisation rates of second-eye surgery is expected in the regions with lower proportions and in older patients. The observed trend suggests that there will be a substantial proportion of unmet need for bilateral surgery.</p

Development of appropriateness explicit criteria for cataract extraction by phacoemulsification

BACKGROUND: Consensus development techniques were used in the late 1980s to create explicit criteria for the appropriateness of cataract extraction. We developed a new appropriateness of indications tool for cataract following the RAND method. We tested the validity of our panel results. METHODS: Criteria were developed using a modified Delphi panel judgment process. A panel of 12 ophthalmologists was assembled. Ratings were analyzed regarding the level of agreement among panelists. We studied the influence of all variables on the final panel score using linear and logistic regression models. The explicit criteria developed were summarized by classification and regression tree analysis. RESULTS: Of the 765 indications evaluated by the main panel in the second round, 32.9% were found appropriate, 30.1% uncertain, and 37% inappropriate. Agreement was found in 53% of the indications and disagreement in 0.9%. Seven variables were considered to create the indications and divided into three groups: simple cataract, with diabetic retinopathy, or with other ocular pathologies. The preoperative visual acuity in the cataractous eye and visual function were the variables that best explained the panel scoring. The panel results were synthesized and presented in three decision trees. Misclassification error in the decision trees, as compared with the panel original criteria, was 5.3%. CONCLUSION: The parameters tested showed acceptable validity for an evaluation tool. These results support the use of this indication algorithm as a screening tool for assessing the appropriateness of cataract extraction in field studies and for the development of practice guidelines

The Cataract National Dataset electronic multi-centre audit of 55,567 operations: risk indicators for monocular visual acuity outcomes.

AIMS: To report risk factors for visual acuity (VA) improvement and harm following cataract surgery using electronically collected multi-centre data conforming to the Cataract National Dataset (CND). METHODS: Routinely collected anonymised data were remotely extracted from the electronic patient record systems of 12 participating NHS Trusts undertaking cataract surgery. Following data checks and cleaning, analyses were performed to identify risk indicators for: (1) a good acuity outcome (VA 6/12 or better), (2) the pre- to postoperative change in VA, and (3) VA loss (doubling or worse of the visual angle). RESULTS: In all, 406 surgeons from 12 NHS Trusts submitted data on 55,567 cataract operations. Preoperative VA was known for 55,528 (99.9%) and postoperative VA outcome for 40,758 (73.3%) operations. Important adverse preoperative risk indicators found in at least 2 of the 3 analyses included older age (3), short axial length (3), any ocular comorbidity (3), age-related macular degeneration (2), diabetic retinopathy (3), amblyopia (2), corneal pathology (2), previous vitrectomy (2), and posterior capsule rupture (PCR) during surgery (3). PCR was the only potentially modifiable adverse risk indicator and was powerfully associated with VA loss (OR=5.74). CONCLUSION: Routinely collected electronic data conforming to the CND provide sufficient detail for identification and quantification of preoperative risk indicators for VA outcomes of cataract surgery. The majority of risk indicators are intrinsic to the patient or their eye, with a notable exception being PCR during surgery