Evaluation of a visual acuity eHealth tool in patients with cataract

To validate the Easee web-based tool for the assessment of visual acuity in patients who underwent cataract surgery.Setting:University Eye Clinic Maastricht, Maastricht, the Netherlands.Design:Prospective method comparison study.Methods:Subjects aged between 18 and 69 years who underwent cataract surgery on 1 or both eyes at the Maastricht University Medical Center+ were eligible to participate in this study. The uncorrected (UDVA) and corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) assessments were performed using the web-based tool (index test) and conventional ETDRS and Snellen charts (reference tests). The outcomes of the different tests were expressed in logMAR, and a difference of <0.15 logMAR was considered clinically acceptable.Results:46 subjects with 75 operated eyes were included in this study. The difference of the UDVA between the web-based tool and ETDRS or Snellen was -0.05 ± 0.10 logMAR (P <.001 [0.15; -0.26]) and -0.04 ± 0.15 logMAR (P =.018 [0.24; -0.33]), respectively. For the CDVA, these differences were -0.04 ± 0.08 logMAR (P <.001 [0.13; -0.21]) and -0.07 ± 0.10 logMAR (P <.001 [0.13; -0.27]), respectively. The Pearson correlation coefficients between the web-based tool and ETDRS were maximally 0.94 and compared with Snellen 0.92. In total, 73% to 88% of the visual acuity measurement differences were within 0.15 logMAR.Conclusions:The web-based tool was validated for the assessment of visual acuity in patients who underwent cataract surgery and showed clinically acceptable outcomes in up to 88% of patients. Most of the participants had a positive attitude toward the web-based tool, which requires basic digital skills

Cost-effectiveness of the ADVISE trial: An intraoperative OCT protocol in DMEK surgery

The intraoperative optical coherence tomography (iOCT) is recently introduced in Descemet membrane endothelial keratoplasty (DMEK) surgery, which aims to increase clinical performance and surgery safety. However, the acquisition of this modality is a substantial investment. The objective of this paper is to report on the cost-effectiveness of an iOCT-protocol in DMEK surgery with the Advanced Visualization in Corneal Surgery Evaluation (ADVISE) trial. This cost-effectiveness analysis uses data 6 months postoperatively from the multicentre prospective randomized clinical ADVISE trial. Sixty-five patients were randomized to usual care (n = 33) or the iOCT-protocol (n = 32). Quality-Adjusted Life Years (EQ-5D-5L), Vision-related Quality of Life (NEI-VFQ-25) and self-administered resources questionnaires were administered. Main outcome is the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and sensitivity analyses. The iOCT protocol reports no statistical difference in ICER. For the usual care group compared with the iOCT protocol, respectively, the mean societal costs are €5027 compared with €4920 (Δ€107). The sensitivity analyses report the highest variability on time variables. This economic evaluation learned that there is no added value in quality of life or cost-effectiveness in using the iOCT protocol in DMEK surgery. The variability of cost variables depends on the characteristics of an eye clinic. The added value of iOCT could gain incrementally by increasing surgical efficiency, and aiding in surgical decision-making

Reduced corneal nerve fibre length in prediabetes and type 2 diabetes: The Maastricht Study

n/

Anesthesia techniques and the risk of complications as reflected in the European Registry of Quality Outcomes for Cataract and Refractive Surgery

Purpose: To determine the trends in anesthesia techniques for cataract surgery over the past decade and their relationship to surgical complications. Setting: Clinics affiliated with the European Registry of Quality Outcomes for Cataract and Refractive Surgery (EUREQUO). Design: Retrospective cross-sectional register-based study. Methods: Variables include patient demographics, visual acuity, ocular comorbidities, surgery characteristics, intraoperative complications, and postoperative complications for the study period from January 2008, to December 2018. The anesthesia methods registered in the EUREQUO and included in the study are topical, combined topical and intracameral, sub-Tenon, regional, and general anesthesia. Multivariate logistic regression models for each complication were constructed to estimate the adjusted odds ratio (OR) and 95% CIs. Results: Complete data were available of 1 354 036 cataract surgeries. Topical anesthesia increased significantly over time (from 30% to 76%, P < .001). Sub-Tenon and regional anesthesia decreased (from 27% and 38% to 16% and 6%, respectively, P < .001), and general and combined topical and intracameral anesthesia remained stable (around 2%). Sub-Tenon (OR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.71-0.91, P < .001), regional (0.74; 95% CI, 0.71-0.78, P < .001), general (0.53; 95% CI, 0.50-0.56, P < .001), and intracameral anesthesia (0.76; 95% CI, 0.64-0.90, P = .001) carried a significantly decreased risk of posterior capsule rupture (PCR), with and without dropped nucleus, compared with topical anesthesia. The risk of endophthalmitis was significantly lower with regional anesthesia compared with topical anesthesia (OR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.44-0.82, P = .001). Conclusions: The use of topical anesthesia for cataract surgery increased over time. Topical anesthesia is associated with an increased risk of PCR with and without dropped nucleus, and endophthalmitis