Change search
ReferencesLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Surgical, antiseptic, and antibiotic practice in cataract surgery: results from the European Observatory in 2013
Umeå University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Clinical Sciences, Ophthalmology.
Show others and affiliations
2015 (English)In: Journal of cataract and refractive surgery, ISSN 0886-3350, E-ISSN 1873-4502, Vol. 41, no 12, 2635-2643 p.Article in journal (Refereed) PublishedText
Abstract [en]

PURPOSE: To report the results from the first iteration of the European Observatory of Cataract Surgery, which was initiated to track changes in surgical, antiseptic, and antibiotic practices in cataract surgery over the coming years. SETTING: Practicing European cataract surgeons (n = 479). DESIGN: Internet-based declarative questionnaire or telephone questionnaire. METHODS: The questionnaire comprised 37 questions divided into 8 categories as follows: screening, surgeon profile, surgical procedure used, product use before arrival at the operating room, techniques for mydriasis and anesthesia, product use during the surgery, product use after the patient leaves the operating room, and surgeon's attitude to guidelines. RESULTS: Cataract surgeons (n = 2700) were initially contacted, of whom 479 (17.7%) were included in the survey. The current baseline survey revealed considerable variation between countries in their implementation of infectious postoperative endophthalmitis (IPOE) prophylaxis. In some countries, adoption of intracameral cefuroxime is almost universal, whereas in others, the use of such prophylaxis is below one half. When intracameral cefuroxime is used, it is generally cefuroxime powder designed for parenteral use. A preparation specifically registered for intracameral use is now available, and this formulation is more commonly used in countries in which intracameral cefuroxime was most widely adopted. CONCLUSION: The baseline results from this ongoing survey suggest a considerable level of heterogeneity between European countries in IPOE prophylaxis. Further iterations of this survey will monitor whether a consensus begins to emerge. Financial Disclosures: This work was supported by Laboratoires Thea, under the supervision of the expert group. Members of the expert group were remunerated by Laboratoires Thea J.F. Stolz, MD, PhD, provided editorial assistance in manuscript preparation, for which he was remunerated by Laboratoires Thea Anders Behndig, Rita Mencucci, and Jacek P. Szaflik report no relevant conflicts of interest.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Elsevier, 2015. Vol. 41, no 12, 2635-2643 p.
National Category
URN: urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-117221DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2015.06.031ISI: 000368320500007PubMedID: 26796444OAI: diva2:906382
Available from: 2016-02-24 Created: 2016-02-23 Last updated: 2016-02-24Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(1508 kB)39 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 1508 kBChecksum SHA-512
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMed

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Behndig, Anders
By organisation
In the same journal
Journal of cataract and refractive surgery

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 39 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

Altmetric score

Total: 60 hits
ReferencesLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link