Assessing Quality of Vision in Cataract Surgery: A Randomized Trial of Digital vs. Paper-Based Questionnaires.

IF 2.6 3区 医学 Q2 OPHTHALMOLOGY
Adi Porat Rein, Mats Lundström, Mor M Dickman, Matan Rosen, Yaron Finkelman, Anastasia Semionov, David Zadok, Adi Abulafia
{"title":"Assessing Quality of Vision in Cataract Surgery: A Randomized Trial of Digital vs. Paper-Based Questionnaires.","authors":"Adi Porat Rein, Mats Lundström, Mor M Dickman, Matan Rosen, Yaron Finkelman, Anastasia Semionov, David Zadok, Adi Abulafia","doi":"10.1097/j.jcrs.0000000000001642","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To introduce a newly developed digital platform and compare its reliability and agreement with paper-based questionnaires for assessing quality of vision before and after cataract surgery.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>University-affiliated ophthalmology department and private clinic.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Prospective, randomized trial with parallel design of 1:1 allocation ratio without masking.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Between 11/2021 and 6/2023, patients from a preoperative cataract clinic, aged ≥21 years, with cataracts in both eyes and internet access were randomly assigned by \"ALEA\" software to complete Catquest-9SF and Quality-of-Vision (QoV) questionnaires before surgery and after second eye surgery via paper or a newly developed digital European Registry of Quality Outcomes in Cataract and Refractive Surgery (EUREQUO) platform. Statistical analyses evaluated agreement between methods, and validation was by Rasch analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Half (183/364, 50.3%) of the enrolled patients were allocated to digital questionnaires. After exclusion due to technical issues, missing questions, and withdrawal, 307/364 patients remained, of whom 159 (51.8%) filled in digital questionnaires. Half of all patients (n=154) underwent sequential surgeries on both eyes after a minimum one-month interval. Seventy-two (72/154, 46.8%) completed postoperative questionnaires. Comparative analysis found no significant differences between paper and digital methods. Catquest-9SF and QoV questionnaires demonstrated good precision and reliability (Rasch analysis). Postoperative vision improved at an average of 2.82 logits.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The newly developed digital EUREQUO platform for patient assessment of quality of vision before and after cataract surgery with the Catquest-9SF and QoV questionnaires, offers a reliable alternative to traditional paper-based questionnaires, enhancing convenience for patients and providers.</p>","PeriodicalId":15214,"journal":{"name":"Journal of cataract and refractive surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of cataract and refractive surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/j.jcrs.0000000000001642","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: To introduce a newly developed digital platform and compare its reliability and agreement with paper-based questionnaires for assessing quality of vision before and after cataract surgery.

Setting: University-affiliated ophthalmology department and private clinic.

Design: Prospective, randomized trial with parallel design of 1:1 allocation ratio without masking.

Methods: Between 11/2021 and 6/2023, patients from a preoperative cataract clinic, aged ≥21 years, with cataracts in both eyes and internet access were randomly assigned by "ALEA" software to complete Catquest-9SF and Quality-of-Vision (QoV) questionnaires before surgery and after second eye surgery via paper or a newly developed digital European Registry of Quality Outcomes in Cataract and Refractive Surgery (EUREQUO) platform. Statistical analyses evaluated agreement between methods, and validation was by Rasch analysis.

Results: Half (183/364, 50.3%) of the enrolled patients were allocated to digital questionnaires. After exclusion due to technical issues, missing questions, and withdrawal, 307/364 patients remained, of whom 159 (51.8%) filled in digital questionnaires. Half of all patients (n=154) underwent sequential surgeries on both eyes after a minimum one-month interval. Seventy-two (72/154, 46.8%) completed postoperative questionnaires. Comparative analysis found no significant differences between paper and digital methods. Catquest-9SF and QoV questionnaires demonstrated good precision and reliability (Rasch analysis). Postoperative vision improved at an average of 2.82 logits.

Conclusion: The newly developed digital EUREQUO platform for patient assessment of quality of vision before and after cataract surgery with the Catquest-9SF and QoV questionnaires, offers a reliable alternative to traditional paper-based questionnaires, enhancing convenience for patients and providers.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
14.30%
发文量
259
审稿时长
8.5 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Cataract & Refractive Surgery (JCRS), a preeminent peer-reviewed monthly ophthalmology publication, is the official journal of the American Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgery (ASCRS) and the European Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgeons (ESCRS). JCRS publishes high quality articles on all aspects of anterior segment surgery. In addition to original clinical studies, the journal features a consultation section, practical techniques, important cases, and reviews as well as basic science articles.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信