Determinants of subjective patient‐reported quality of vision after small‐incision lenticule extraction. Issue 11 (November 2019)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Schmelter, Valerie; Dirisamer, Martin; Siedlecki, Jakob; Shajari, Mehdi; Kreutzer, Thomas C.; Mayer, Wolfgang J.; Priglinger, Siegfried G.; Luft, Nikolaus
• Is Part Of: Journal of cataract and refractive surgery. Volume 45:Issue 11(2019)
• Publication Date: 2019-11
• Subjects: 617.7
• DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2019.06.012
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0886-3350

Abstract

Abstract : Purpose : To characterize patient‐reported long‐term quality of vision (QoV) after small‐incision lenticule extraction (SMILE), and to identify potential clinical parameters that might predispose to experiencing deteriorated visual quality. Setting : University Eye Hospital, Ludwig‐Maximilians‐University, Munich, Germany. Design : Prospective cross‐sectional study. Methods : For the assessment and scoring of visual symptoms, the Quality of Vision questionnaire was employed, which constitutes a clinically validated, linear‐scaled 30‐item instrument providing a QoV score on three scales (symptom frequency, severity, and bothersome). Subgroup analyses were performed for patient subgroups stratified by baseline characteristics (eg, age) and treatment parameters (eg, surgical refractive correction) as well as refractive outcomes (eg, residual refraction) and visual outcomes (eg, uncorrected distance visual acuity [UDVA]). Results : The study comprised 394 eyes of 197 patients (117 women [59.4%], 80 men [40.6%]) were included with a mean postoperative follow‐up of 24.4 months ± 14.1 (SD). The QoV scores for symptom frequency, severity, and bothersome were 34.63 ± 13.69, 29.60 ± 12.38, and 24.56 ± 16.00, respectively. Patients with a preoperative binocular corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) of 20/12.5 or better, patients who lost 1 or more lines of UDVA as compared with preoperative CDVA, patients older than the age of 40, and patients with inadvertent anisometropia more than 0.375 diopters reported worse QoV scores. Conclusion : The relationship between objective clinical parameters and patient‐reported subjective QoV after SMILE seems complex. Defined prognostic factors that convey a higher risk for experiencing visual disturbances were identifiable and should be discussed with patients seeking SMILE treatment during preoperative counseling.