English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Background and Objectives:  to evaluate whether a set of questions after a routine cataract surgery can predict unexpected findings and avoid an unnecessary follow-up visit.  Materials and Methods:  single-center, prospective, cohort study included 177 routine cataract surgery cases of two experienced surgeons between November 2019 and December 2020. Inclusion criteria included unremarkable postoperative day one follow-up examination. A set of seven questions regarding complaints with positive or negative answers was presented at the second follow-up visit (PV2)—one week (mean 8.34 ± 1.73 days) after the surgery. The outcome measures were the incidence of unexpected management changes (UMCs) at the PV2 visit (change or addition from a prescribed postoperative drop plan, extra procedures, an urgent referral to an ophthalmologist) and UMCs associations with the answers to a question set.  Results:  81.4% of patients had no complaints about postoperative ocular status and answered with negative answers, 18.6% reported one or more complaint (positive answer): dissatisfaction with postoperative visual acuity (6.2%, 11 cases), eye pain (4.0%, 7 cases), increase in floaters after the surgery (4.0%, 7 cases), red eye (4.0%, 7 cases) and others. The prevalence of UMCs at PV2 was 1.7% (3 cases), of which 0.6% (1 case) was the prolonged antibiotic prescription due to conjunctivitis, 0.6% (1 case) was the addition of IOP lowering medication and 0.6% (1 case) was additional medication due to uveitis management. None of the complaints (positive answers) at PV2 were associated with the incidence of UMCs ( p  > 0.05).  Conclusions:  there were no associations of UMCs determined with positive answers to the questions. The prediction of UMCs incidence based on the positive answers was not obtained. Thus, we cannot exclude the necessity of a postoperative week one follow-up visit.

Can a Set of Questions after Routine Cataract Surgery Predict Unexpected Findings and Avoid an Unnecessary Follow-Up Visit?