Immediate vs delayed sequential cataract surgery: a comparative study

Same-day sequential cataract surgery

“…6/6, 86% ! 6/9 Arshinoff et al [13] Canada 1020 Phaco: Low complication rate Chang [14] USA >6000 since 1995 BJO editorial review reporting no cases of bilateral endophthalmitis from 1995-2003 Johansson and Lundh [15] Sweden 220 VA !20/40 in 78% of eyes Sarikkola et al [16] Finland 141 BCVA 84% !20/40, 96% surveyed viewed experience as positive Ozdek et al [17] Turkey 1 Case report of bilateral endophthalmitis Packard [18] UK 100 SBCS with ReSTOR IOLs (Alcon) Lundstrom et al [19] UK 96 Randomized trial: Quicker visual recovery and better contrast sensitivity of SBCS vs. UCS Nassiri et al [20 ] Iran 220 More rapid rehabilitation of visual function in SBCS vs. UCS in nonrandomized trial Chalioulias and Tsaloumas [21] UK 1 Bilateral CME case report Kim et al [22] Korea 1 Bilateral TASS case report (not SBCS)…”

Immediate sequential bilateral cataract surgery: A 5-year retrospective analysis of 2470 eyes from a tertiary care eye center in South India

“…However, other studies have proven beyond doubts that ISBCS has a tremendous impact on cutting down health-care cost to almost half. [4041424344454647] In our country, where there is a long waiting list for cataract surgery, and the health-care providers are mostly concentrated in the urban areas, ISBCS may be considered provided strict protocols are followed. It may provide significant patient benefits in terms of better compliance with postoperative medications, reduced hospital visits, faster visual rehabilitation, and shorter period of restrictions after surgery.…”

A Cost-Minimization Analysis Comparing Immediate Sequential Cataract Surgery and Delayed Sequential Cataract Surgery From the Payer, Patient, and Societal Perspectives in the United States

“…Previous studies 1,[6][7][8][9][10][11][12] have demonstrated that ISCS is equally safe and efficacious compared with DSCS. This US-based cost-minimization analysis found that ISCS resulted in significant cost reductions compared with DSCS from the payer and patient perspectives.…”

“…A second important concern is whether ISCS and DSCS are equally effective in refractive results, visual outcomes, and patient satisfaction. Prospective clinical trials 1,7,9 comparing the refractive results of ISCS and DSCS found that the refractive outcomes were equivalent between the 2 groups: the studies compared ISCS and DSCS in terms of visual function and patient satisfaction using Visual Function 7, Visual Function 14, and Cataract Symptoms 5 scores and found no difference in visual function or patient satisfaction between the groups after surgical procedures on both eyes had been completed. An economic analysis in Finland found that surgical outcomes and patient satisfaction were similar in ISCS and DSCS groups and noted that "[b]ecause of equal effectiveness, the cost-effectiveness analysis turned into a cost analysis."…”

“…The surgical facility component of this study focused on ambulatory surgery center (ASC) and hospital outpatient department (HOPD) models in a private practice setting. Given that previous studies 1,7,9,12 have shown equivalent efficacy between ISCS and DSCS, a costminimization analysis comparing ISCS with DSCS in the United States was performed to evaluate the economic cost and potential policy implications from the payer, patient, and societal perspectives.…”