Comparison of cognitive workload and surgical outcomes between a three-dimensional and conventional microscope macular hole surgery.

BACKGROUND: Performing a surgical task subjects the surgeon to multitudinal stressors, especially with the newer 3D technology. The quantum of cognitive workload using this modern surgical system in comparison to the Conventional microscope system remains unexplored. We evaluate the surgeon's cognitive workload and the surgical outcomes of macular hole(MH) surgery performed on a 3D versus a Conventional microscope operating system. METHODS: 50 eyes of 50 patients with MH undergoing surgery using the 3D or Conventional microscope visualization system. Cognitive workload assessment was done by real-time tools(Surgeons' heart rate [HR] and oxygen saturation[SPO2]) and self-report tool(Surgery Task Load Index[SURG-TLX] questionnaire) of three Vitreoretinal surgeons. Based on the SURG-TLX questionnaire, an assessment of the workload was performed. RESULTS: Of the 50 eyes, 30 eyes and 20 eyes underwent surgery with the Conventional microscope and the 3D system, respectively. No difference was noted in the MH basal-diameter(p = 0.128), total surgical-duration(p = 0.299), internal-limiting membrane(ILM) peel time(p = 0.682), and the final visual acuity (VA; p = 0.515) between the two groups. Both groups showed significant improvement in VA(p < 0.001) with a 90% closure rate at one-month post-surgery. Cognitive workload comparison, the intraoperative HR(p = 0.024), total workload score(P = 0.005), and temporal-demand dimension(p = 0.004) were significantly more in Conventional microscope group as compared to 3D group. In both the groups, the HR increased significantly from the baseline while performing ILM peeling and at the end. CONCLUSION: The surgeon's cognitive workload is markedly reduced while performing macular hole surgery with a 3D viewing system. Moreover, duration of surgery including ILM peel time, MH closure rates, and visual outcomes remains unaffected irrespective of the operating microscope system.

A mobile team for screening of retinopathy of prematurity in India: Cost - effectiveness, outcomes, and impact assessment.

PURPOSE: To study the cost effectiveness, outcomes and impact of retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) screening and management model for urban neonatal intensive care units (NICUs). STUDY DESIGN: Public health intervention study. METHODS: This study was conducted in 2013. Staff of a mobile unit assessed all infants aged less than 34 weeks of Gestation age at birth and/or birth weight 1700 GM or less admitted in five NICUs between 2013 and 2015. A trained ophthalmologist performed bedside ROP screening through dilated pupils using indirect ophthalmoscope. ROP was graded and managed as per the International Classification of Retinopathy of Prematurity treatment guidelines. Counseling and laser treatment were the interventions. The incidence, grade and determinants of ROP were estimated. Direct and indirect costs were calculated to estimate the unit cost of screening and managing a child with ROP using the model. RESULTS: The study sample included 102 preterm/underweight infants. The prevalence of ROP of different grades in either eye was 32% (95% Confidence Intervals (CI): 23.2-41.5). ROP stage I was present in 75% of these eyes. The model could help in preventing/reducing visual disability in 4 infants with advanced stages of ROP. The unit cost of ROP screening, identifying one child with ROP and addressing visual disability due to ROP was US $ 198.9, 596.7 and 4,137.4 respectively. CONCLUSION: A mobile screening is likely feasible and cost-effective method to detect ROP and offer timely intervention for NICU in urban areas with limited resources.

Mobile unit for retinopathy of prematurity screening and management at urban Neonatal Intensive Care Units: Outcomes and impact assessment.

PURPOSE: To study the outcomes and impact of a mobile unit for retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) screening and management at urban Neonatal Intensive Care Units (NICUs). STUDY DESIGN: Public health intervention study. METHODS: This study was conducted in 2012. Staff of a mobile unit assessed all infants aged 32 weeks or less and/or weight 1250 g or less admitted in five NICUs between 2009 and 2011. An ophthalmologist performed bedside ROP screening through dilated pupils using indirect ophthalmoscopy. ROP was graded and managed as per the International Classification of ROP treatment guidelines. Counseling and laser treatment were the interventions. The incidence, grade, and determinants of ROP were estimated. Direct and indirect costs were calculated to estimate the unit cost of screening and managing a child with ROP using the mobile unit. RESULT: The study sample included 104 preterm/underweight infants. The prevalence of ROP of different grades in either eye was 32.7% (95% confidence intervals: 23.7-41.7). ROP Stage I was present in 75% of these eyes. The mobile unit could help in preventing/reducing visual disability in 5 infants with advanced stages of ROP. The unit cost of ROP screening, identifying one child with ROP, and addressing visual disability due to ROP was US $310, 950, and 6500, respectively. CONCLUSION: A mobile screening is likely feasible and cost-effective method to detect ROP and offer timely intervention in urban areas with limited resources.