Dataset Information

Cataract Surgical Planning Using Online Software vs Traditional Methods: A Time/Motion and Quality of Care Study.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

The objective of this study is to compare two methods of preoperative planning for placement of intraocular implants: traditional paper documentation/electronic scans versus a novel online planning software. The aim was to compare the time required and number of data points manually transcribed with each method and to explore whether differences in surgical accuracy could be identified between the two methods in a small sample of 40 patients.

Methods

In this study, preoperative planning was performed twice for all enrolled patients: once through the traditional method and once using an online planning software system. The total time spent and number of data points manually transferred were recorded for each method.

Results

Of the 40 patients enrolled, the mean total surgical planning time was 239 ± 190 seconds for the traditional method vs 63 ± 31 seconds with the online planning software (P<0.00001). The mean number of data points transcribed was 7.2 ± 7.2 for the traditional method vs 0.9 ± 1.7 with the online planning software (P<0.0000001). No statistically significant differences were noted in terms of accuracy of prediction of the spherical equivalent surgical outcome.

Conclusion

In comparison to traditional methods, a significant reduction in time required for surgical planning and the manual transcription of data points was noted when a comprehensive online surgical planning software was used. This has important implications for the efficiency and likely the safety of surgical planning.

SUBMITTER: Gujral T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8326940 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundNLP models like ChatGPT promise to revolutionize text-based content delivery, particularly in medicine. Yet, doubts remain about ChatGPT's ability to reliably support evaluations of cognitive performance, warranting further investigation into its accuracy and comprehensiveness in this area.MethodA cohort of 60 cognitively normal individuals and 30 stroke survivors underwent a comprehensive evaluation, covering memory, numerical processing, verbal fluency, and abstract thinking. Healthcare professionals and NLP models GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 conducted evaluations following established standards. Scores were compared, and efforts were made to refine scoring protocols and interaction methods to enhance ChatGPT's potential in these evaluations.ResultWithin the cohort of healthy participants, the utilization of GPT-3.5 revealed significant disparities in memory evaluation compared to both physician-led assessments and those conducted utilizing GPT-4 (P < 0.001). Furthermore, within the domain of memory evaluation, GPT-3.5 exhibited discrepancies in 8 out of 21 specific measures when compared to assessments conducted by physicians (P < 0.05). Additionally, GPT-3.5 demonstrated statistically significant deviations from physician assessments in speech evaluation (P = 0.009). Among participants with a history of stroke, GPT-3.5 exhibited differences solely in verbal assessment compared to physician-led evaluations (P = 0.002). Notably, through the implementation of optimized scoring methodologies and refinement of interaction protocols, partial mitigation of these disparities was achieved.ConclusionChatGPT can produce evaluation outcomes comparable to traditional methods. Despite differences from physician evaluations, refinement of scoring algorithms and interaction protocols has improved alignment. ChatGPT performs well even in populations with specific conditions like stroke, suggesting its versatility. GPT-4 yields results closer to physician ratings, indicating potential for further enhancement. These findings highlight ChatGPT's importance as a supplementary tool, offering new avenues for information gathering in medical fields and guiding its ongoing development and application.

Project description:The Optical Quality Analysis System (OQAS, Visiometrics) provides objective measurements of image formed onto retina, by combining quantification of ocular media transparency and of optical aberrations. In order to evaluate its contribution in the assessment of age-related cataract, we conducted a monocentric clinical study to determine the relationships between clinical grading of lens opacity, OQAS parameters, and parameters required for cataract surgery by phacoemulsification with ultrasound (called "phacodynamics"). Clinical parameters were: best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA, expressed as Log of minimal angle resolution (logMAR)) and the lens opacity classification system III (LOCS III) as a gold standard determined by two independent observers who graded total cataract and nuclear, cortical and posterior sub capsular components. The OQAS provided an objective scatter index (OSI), a modulation transfer function (MTF, expressed in cycle per degree (cpd)) and a Strehl ratio (SR) used as an aberration marker. Patients were operated on by the same surgeon using a phacoemulsification machine that provided the cumulative dissipated energy (CDE) and total ultrasound time (US time) necessary to extract the lens. Patients with poor compliance, corneal or retinal diseases impairing OSI, or who required surgical settings variation, were excluded. Twenty-one eyes of 21 patients aged 76±8 years were analyzed. They were 11 pure nuclear, 3 pure cortical, and 7 mixed cataracts. Mean LOCS III and OSI were respectively: 4.86 ±2.03 and 6.12 ±3.07 (mean±SD). Medians (10°-90° percentiles) were: for BCVA 0.30 (0.10-0.70) logMAR, for MTF cutoff 9.31 (1.54-30.57) cpd, for SR 0.071 (0.042-0.146), for CDE 8.04 (5.74-23.29) and for US time 58 (39-116) seconds. LOCS III was significantly correlated (spearman r, rs) with BCVA (rs = 0.561, p = 0.008), CDE (rs = 0.457, p = 0.038) and US time (rs = 0.647, p = 0.002). The three OQAS parameters significantly correlated (all rs ≥ 0.526, p<0.05) with BCVA, and LOCS III grading, but the strongest correlations were found with OSI for cortical components and with MTF for nuclear components: only OSI may be used objectively to assess the effect of cortical components on optical quality, and MTF cutoff-integrating scattering and aberrations-seems the best objective parameter for clinical assessment of nuclear cataracts. The three OQAS parameters were also significantly correlated (rs) with CDE, and with US time only for pure nuclear cataracts: OSI had the strongest correlations with phacodynamics (rs = 0.693, p = 0.022 with CDE and rs = 0.703, p = 0.019 US time). OSI increased with cortical components not requiring higher CDE. When measured in optimal conditions (good compliance, no retinal or ocular surface or tear film diseases), the three OQAS parameters are complementary for objective grading of cataract. In the future, they may help to optimize surgical parameters, especially energy distribution, in femtosecond laser assisted cataract surgery.

Project description:BackgroundTraditional methods for assessing prescriber knowledge can take several years to deliver results. This study was undertaken to obtain insights into the potential for using existing online communities to educate prescribers on therapy-related safety risks.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to describe approaches to measuring prescribers' knowledge of safety risk (osteonecrosis of the jaw) outlined in the European Medicine Agency's summary of product characteristics for denosumab (XGEVA®).MethodsShort multiple-choice online instruments were administered as (1) a two-round cross-sectional survey fielded in January 2013-May 2015 (traditional, nine European countries, study duration: 3 years), (2) a survey targeting the online Medscape community (seven European countries, study duration: 3 weeks), and (3) a continuing medical education module with pre-/post-assessment in an online Medscape community (Medscape Education, USA). All respondents were oncologists; treated five or more patients with bone metastases from solid tumours in the previous 3 months; and prescribed denosumab within the previous 12 months. Medscape (a WebMD company, New York, NY, USA) is the leading online medical information resource, serving approximately 3 million physicians worldwide and 400,000 within Europe.ResultsIn the traditional 29-month study, 420 (n = 210 per round; 14% of screened physicians) individuals participated. Knowledge levels exceeded 75% correct on five questions (incidence of osteonecrosis of the jaw, concomitant risk factors and prevention of osteonecrosis of the jaw during denosumab treatment, importance of ensuring oral hygiene, and care for patients who have or develop osteonecrosis of the jaw) with less awareness of optimal osteonecrosis of the jaw treatment. The Medscape survey (n = 207; 32.1% of 645 eligible) provided similar results in a 3-week post-survey launch. The Medscape Education study (n = 264) documented knowledge acquisition.ConclusionsAssessments that target physicians through online platforms where they seek information about drug-related safety risks may result in increased efficiencies, informing regulators about prescribers' knowledge of safe use within weeks rather than years. Online communities or professional societies may provide venues in which to implement knowledge-acquisition surveys tied to training/education modules that address safety topics.

Project description:Even with advanced inverse-planning techniques, radiation treatment plan opti-mization remains a very time-consuming task with great output variability, which prompted the development of more automated approaches. One commercially available technique mimics the actions of experienced human operators to pro-gressively guide the traditional optimization process with automatically created regions of interest and associated dose-volume objectives. We report on the initial evaluation of this algorithm on 10 challenging cases of locoreginally advanced head and neck cancer. All patients were treated with VMAT to 70 Gy to the gross disease and 56 Gy to the elective bilateral nodes. The results of post-treatment autoplanning (AP) were compared to the original human-driven plans (HDP). We used an objective scoring system based on defining a collection of specific dosimetric metrics and corresponding numeric score functions for each. Five AP techniques with different input dose goals were applied to all patients. The best of them averaged the composite score 8% lower than the HDP, across the patient population. The difference in median values was statistically significant at the 95% confidence level (Wilcoxon paired signed-rank test p = 0.027). This result reflects the premium the institution places on dose homogeneity, which was consistently higher with the HDPs. The OAR sparing was consistently better with the APs, the differences reaching statistical significance for the mean doses to the parotid glands (p < 0.001) and the inferior pharyngeal constrictor (p = 0.016), as well as for the maximum doses to the spinal cord (p = 0.018) and brainstem (p = 0.040). If one is prepared to accept less stringent dose homogeneity criteria from the RTOG 1016 protocol, nine APs would comply with the protocol, while providing lower OAR doses than the HDPs. Overall, AP is a promising clinical tool, but it could benefit from a better process for shifting the balance between the target dose coverage/homogeneity and OAR sparing.

Project description:Importance:In the Medicare Advantage (MA) program, Medicare enrollees may be steered by their health plan to specific hospitals. Little is known about the quality of hospitals that serve MA enrollees. Objective:To compare the quality of hospitals that admit MA enrollees with the quality of those that admit traditional Medicare enrollees. Design, Setting, and Participants:This cross-sectional study used data from the 2012 to 2016 Medicare Provider Analysis and Review to compare quality of care, as measured by the star rating given by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and readmission rates, in hospitals that serve MA enrollees and traditional Medicare enrollees using multinomial logit models. Participants were 7?130?610 Medicare beneficiaries admitted to 2994 acute care hospitals across the United States in 2016. Data were analyzed between August 2018 and August 2019. Exposures:The exposure was MA enrollment. Adjusters included demographic and clinical characteristics and zip code fixed effects. Main Outcomes and Measures:Hospital Compare star ratings and quintiles of performance in 30-day readmission rates. Results:The sample included 7?130?610 Medicare beneficiaries in 2016 (54.3% female; mean [SD] age, 72.7 [13.2] years). Of 12?190?270 total hospitalizations, 1?211?293 traditional Medicare and 494?352 MA patients were admitted to 718 low-readmission hospitals and 1?205?586 traditional Medicare and 526?955 MA patients were admitted to 597 high-readmission hospitals. Accounting for observed patient characteristics, MA enrollees less often entered either low- or high-quality hospitals and were more often admitted to average-quality hospitals. For nonemergent hospitalizations, MA enrollees were 1.9 percentage points (95% CI, 1.5-2.2 percentage points) less likely to enter a low-readmissions hospital, 5.1 percentage points (95% CI, 4.6-5.6 percentage points) more likely to enter an average-readmissions hospital, and 3.2 percentage points (95% CI, 2.9-3.5 percentage points) less likely to enter a high-readmissions hospital compared with traditional Medicare enrollees. Patients with MA were also 2.6 percentage points (95% CI, 2.2-2.9 percentage points) less likely to enter a 1- to 2-star hospital, 5.5 percentage points (95% CI, 4.9-5.9 percentage points) more likely to enter a 3-star hospital, and 2.8 percentage points (95% CI, 2.5-3.2 percentage points) less likely to enter a 4- to 5-star hospital compared with traditional Medicare enrollees. The differences were less pronounced for emergency admissions. Conclusions and Relevance:This study found that enrollees in MA plans were more likely to be admitted to average-quality hospitals instead of either high- or low-quality hospitals, suggesting that MA plans may be steering their enrollees to specific hospitals.