IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v20y2023i2p1611-d1037275.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Pros and Cons of Immediate Sequential Bilateral Cataract Surgery from a Patient Perspective: A Survey

Author

Listed:
  • Iwona Obuchowska

    (Department of Ophthalmology, Medical University of Białystok, Kilińskiego 1 STR, 15-089 Białystok, Poland)

  • Zuzanna Micun

    (Department of Ophthalmology, Medical University of Białystok, Kilińskiego 1 STR, 15-089 Białystok, Poland)

  • Maryla Młynarczyk

    (Department of Ophthalmology, Medical University of Białystok, Kilińskiego 1 STR, 15-089 Białystok, Poland)

  • Diana Anna Dmuchowska

    (Department of Ophthalmology, Medical University of Białystok, Kilińskiego 1 STR, 15-089 Białystok, Poland)

  • Joanna Konopińska

    (Department of Ophthalmology, Medical University of Białystok, Kilińskiego 1 STR, 15-089 Białystok, Poland)

Abstract

The aim of the study was to analyze patients’ experiences with immediate sequential bilateral cataract surgery (ISBCS). An anonymous survey was sent by post to patients who underwent ISBCS between 1 May 2020 and 30 April 2022. A total of 195 participants completed the survey. Specifically, 94.6% of the respondents were satisfied with the possibility of having both eyes treated during one surgical procedure, 89.7% would choose ISBCS again if offered a choice, and 89.2% would recommend this procedure to their family members. ISBCS provided a subjective benefit for 84.6% of the respondents. The most commonly reported ISBCS-related problems were the necessity to sleep in a supine position (32.8%), inability to read shortly after the surgery (27.7%), having both eyes protected with a dressing (24.6%), and application of eyedrops to both eyes at the same time (17.4%). All patients were able to identify some pros of ISBCS, with the most common being single stay in the operating room (82.6%), lower number of visits to the clinic (62.6%), quick normalization of eyesight (61%), time savings for family members (54.9%), quick adjustment of reading glasses (32.3%), and economical aspects (23.6%). The perception of difficulties associated with ISBCS and the benefits offered by this procedure differed depending on patients’ gender, age, marital status, education, place of residence, occupational activity, level of care dependence, and everyday activities. Understanding patients’ opinions about ISBCS provides insight into the advantages and disadvantages of this procedure from a broader perspective.

Suggested Citation

  • Iwona Obuchowska & Zuzanna Micun & Maryla Młynarczyk & Diana Anna Dmuchowska & Joanna Konopińska, 2023. "Pros and Cons of Immediate Sequential Bilateral Cataract Surgery from a Patient Perspective: A Survey," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(2), pages 1-15, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:20:y:2023:i:2:p:1611-:d:1037275
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/20/2/1611/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/20/2/1611/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Monali S Malvankar-Mehta & Yufeng Nancy Chen & Sangita Patel & Angela Pui-Kei Leung & Man Mohan Merchea & William G Hodge, 2015. "Immediate versus Delayed Sequential Bilateral Cataract Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(6), pages 1-18, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.

      Corrections

      All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:20:y:2023:i:2:p:1611-:d:1037275. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

      If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

      If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

      If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

      For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

      Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

      IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.