ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: During the COVID-19, elective cataract surgery (CS) was significantly curtailed. We investigated whether consequent reduction of micro-surgical skills practice might lead to higher operative complications. METHODS: Single-centre, electronic note review of consecutive patients undergoing CS during three periods: 1st February 2019 to 13th January 2020 (P1) prior to pandemic; 3rd June 2020 to 11th January 2021 after 1st lockdown (P2); and 25th January to 30th July 2021 (P3) after/during second lockdown. RESULTS: 2276 operations occurred during P1, 999 during P2, 846 during P3. During P1, posterior capsular rupture (PCR) rate was 1.67%, similar to P2 (1.30%, p = 0.54), but lower than P3 (3.55%, p = 0.002). There was no difference in PCR risk percentage scores between routine and PCR cases during P1 (1.90% vs 2.03%, p = 0.83), P2 (2% vs 2.18%, p = 0.18), or P3 (1.87% vs. 2.71%, p = 0.08). During P2 and P3, there was a higher rate of cystoid macular oedema (CMO) compared with P1 (4.9% and 6.86% vs. 1.93%, p = 0.0001), with no differences in proportion of diabetics or cases with CMO in combination with PCR. There was no difference in surgeons grade experiencing PCR. CONCLUSIONS: In P3 following 9 months of curtailed elective CS, PCR rates were increased across all surgeon grades, occurring in cases with similar risk percentage scores. CMO rates were increased during COVID and not related to proportion of diabetics or increased PCR rates. The reduction in elective CS during the pandemic was associated with more complications, perhaps due to attenuation of microsurgical skills.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To ascertain patient acceptance of immediate sequential bilateral cataract surgery (ISBCS) in the National Health Service (NHS). METHODS: A survey was devised using a 5-point Likert scale for questions related to ISBCS, which patients undertook during their cataract outpatient appointment pre-COVID-19 lockdown and by telephone during the lockdown. RESULTS: Questionnaires were completed for 267 patients. Most respondents were aged over 71 (51%) and were female individuals (60%). Forty-five per cent agreed/strongly agreed with opting for ISBCS. A positive correlation was identified between opting for ISBCS and convenience to the patient (r=0.76, p<0.01) and family/carer/partner (r=0.71, p<0.01) and wanting to limit numbers of hospital visits (r=0.57, p<0.01). Fifty per cent agreed/strongly agreed that they were worried about the risk of simultaneous bilateral ocular complications, with this correlating with being less likely to opt for ISBCS (r=-0.49, p<0.01) and being scared of ISBCS (r=0.67, p<0.01). During COVID-19 lockdown, patients were less likely to want to minimise the time taken off work (p<0.05) and less intolerant of a prolonged hospital visit (p<0.05). Only 23% of respondents agreed/strongly agreed that they had familiarity with ISBCS. CONCLUSIONS: ISBCS was acceptable to 45% of our sampled population, suggesting limited routine implementation in the NHS is possible. Convenience and reduction in hospital visits appeared to contribute to this acceptance. Half of the patients expressed concern regarding bilateral complications and such concerns need addressing. Some attitudes did appear to change during the COVID-19 lockdown period. The familiarity of the concept of ISBCS is low suggesting the need for patient education.