Search PubMed⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 16304588

High-volume surgery in developing countries.

D Yorston
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Cataract remains the world's leading cause of blindness. In the developing world, many eye clinics provide cataract surgery for only a small proportion of those in need. This is partly because of low demand-caused by barriers related to awareness, bad services, cost, and distance--and partly because of deficiencies in the supply of services. This article reviews innovations in cataract surgery in poor countries that are intended to reverse this trend. CONCLUSIONS: Increasing the number of operations, through close involvement with the community, and improved surgical outcomes, enables the cost of surgery to be reduced, leading to further growth in volume. Recent innovations, such as low-cost intraocular lenses, and small-incision extracapsular cataract extraction, have contributed to improving the results of surgery without increasing the costs. Effective management enables the delivery of increasing the numbers of operations, while at the same time improving outcomes and controlling costs.

Explore related subjects

Cataract ExtractionDelivery of Health CareDeveloping CountriesHealth Services AccessibilityHealth Services Needs and DemandHumansOphthalmologyPatient Acceptance of Health CareJournal ArticleReview

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

D Yorston. 2005. High-volume surgery in developing countries.. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.eye.6701966

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2006

Hospital Episode Statistics and changing trends in glaucoma surgery.

BACKGROUND: A number of authors have documented the decrease in the rate of glaucoma drainage surgery, felt to be owing to increased medical therapy options. There has also been an increase in cataract extraction. The aim of this study was, using the NHS Hospital Episode Statistics (HES), to attempt to confirm these trends and to examine the possibility that these trends are not necessarily independent. METHODS: The HES was accessed for the main glaucoma procedures between 1998 and 2004 and for cataract operations performed over the same time period. Diagnostic data were also extracted from the HES data for glaucoma. Figures for the changes in glaucoma medications were obtained from pharmaceutical data. RESULTS: Over the period that the data are available, trabeculectomy numbers have reduced by 51%, laser trabeculoplasty by 60%, and laser peripheral iridectomy (PI) by 30%. Cataract extractions have increased by 52%. Medical treatments, especially prostaglandin use, have increased. The number of admissions for acute glaucoma did not increase. CONCLUSIONS: The figures indicated a decrease in glaucoma drainage surgery and an increase in cataract extraction-consistent with other studies. More surprisingly, there was no increase in diagnosis of angle closure glaucoma or laser PIs within the figures and we suggest this may in part be related to the increase in cataract extraction. We speculate that this may also partly be responsible for the reduction in trabeculectomies. Although the HES data are a potentially rich source of information, there are potential inaccuracies in the data, which means interpretations must be made with caution.

Cataract Extraction↗
PubMed2006

Aqueous shunts for glaucoma.

BACKGROUND: Aqueous shunts are employed for intraocular pressure (IOP) control in primary and secondary glaucomas that fail medical, laser, and other surgical therapies. OBJECTIVES: This review compares aqueous shunts for IOP control and safety. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, NRR all in January 2006, LILACS to February 2004 and reference lists of included trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included all randomized and quasi-randomized trials in which one arm of the study involved shunts. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently extracted data for included studies and a third adjudicated discrepancies. We contacted investigators for missing information. We used fixed-effect models and summarized continuous outcomes using mean differences. MAIN RESULTS: We included fifteen trials with a total of 1153 participants with mixed diagnoses. Five studies reported details sufficient to verify the method of randomization but only two had adequate allocation concealment. Data collection and follow-up times were variable.Meta-analysis of two trials comparing Ahmed implant with trabeculectomy found trabeculectomy resulted in lower mean IOPs 11 to 13 months later (mean difference 3.81 mm Hg, 95% CI 1.94 to 5.69 mm Hg). Meta-analysis of two trials comparing double-plate Molteno implant with the Schocket shunt was not done due to substantial heterogeneity. One study comparing ridged with standard double-plate Molteno implants found no clinically significant differences in outcome. Two trials investigating the effectiveness of adjunctive mitomycin (MMC) with the Molteno and Ahmed implants found no evidence of benefit with MMC. Two trials that investigated surgical technique variations with the Ahmed found no benefit with partial tube ligation or excision of Tenon's capsule. One study concluded there were outcome advantages with a double versus a single-plate Molteno implant and one trial comparing the 350 mm(2) and 500 mm(2) Baerveldt shunts found no clinically significant advantage of the larger device but neither of these trials included all patients randomized. One study suggested improved clinical outcome when MMC was employed with a newly described shunt including ultrasound supporting the conclusion. One small study did not demonstrate an outcome advantage to systemic steroid use postoperatively with single-plate Molteno shunts. One study comparing endocyclophotocoagulation (ECP) with Ahmed implant in complicated glaucomas found no evidence of better IOP control with Ahmed implant over ECP. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Relatively few randomized trials have been published on aqueous shunts and methodology and data quality among them is poor. To date there is no evidence of superiority of one shunt over another.

Cataract Extraction↗