Patient preferences for anaesthesia management during cataract surgery.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: To assess patient preferences for different anaesthesia management strategies during cataract surgery. METHODS: Cross sectional clinic based study of patient preferences for anaesthesia management strategies. Patients rated their preferences using a linear rating scale from 0 to 100. RESULTS: Subjects tended to prefer block to topical anaesthesia and oral to intravenous sedation. On a scale from 0 to 100, subjects preferred oral to intravenous sedation and block to topical anaesthesia by about 8 points. CONCLUSIONS: When given the choice of four different anaesthesia management strategies, 72% of the study subjects preferred block anaesthesia to topical anaesthesia. More patients chose to have oral sedation than intravenous sedation. These findings indicate that patients may prefer anaesthesia management approaches other than the ones they are currently being offered.

A decision analysis of anesthesia management for cataract surgery.

PURPOSE: To compare the trade-offs in cost and preference of various anesthesia management strategies for cataract surgery. METHODS: Six strategies, differing in sedation, local anesthetic, and monitoring approach, were chosen for comparison. For each strategy, potential complications, and conversions to different anesthesia approaches were modeled. A panel of physicians and anesthetists, well versed in the literature and practice of the anesthesia management of cataract surgery, assigned preference values to the strategies and potential outcomes (0 to 1 scale). Probability estimates were obtained from a study of 19,557 cataract surgeries and from the panel. Cost estimates were derived from several sources. The model was analyzed to determine the strategies associated with the highest expected preference and lowest expected cost. RESULTS: The strategy associated with the highest net preference was intravenous sedation with block anesthesia and an anesthesiologist present throughout the case. The expected net preference for this strategy was 19% greater than the net preference for the next most preferred strategy, oral sedation with block anesthesia and an anesthesiologist on call (0.88 versus 0.74), but the expected anesthesia costs per case were much greater ($324 versus $42). Results were sensitive to plausible variation in the preference values assigned to the six initial management strategies and to the cost of topical versus block anesthesia. CONCLUSION: This analysis emphasizes that cost and preference are important considerations when choosing an anesthesia management strategy for cataract surgery. For some surgeries, substantial cost savings may be available for a small change in preference.

Adverse intraoperative medical events and their association with anesthesia management strategies in cataract surgery.

OBJECTIVE: To compare adverse medical events by different anesthesia strategies for cataract surgery. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. PARTICIPANTS: Patients 50 years of age and older undergoing 19,250 cataract surgeries at nine centers in the United States and Canada between June 1995 and June 1997. INTERVENTION: Local anesthesia applied topically or by injection, with or without oral and intravenous sedatives, opioid analgesia, hypnotics, and diphenhydramine (Benadryl). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Intraoperative and postoperative adverse medical events. RESULTS: Twenty-six percent of surgeries were performed with topical anesthesia and the remainder with injection anesthesia. There was no increase in deaths and hospitalizations associated with any specific anesthesia strategy. No statistically significant difference was observed in the prevalence of intraoperative events between topical and injection anesthesia without intravenous sedatives (0.13% and 0.78%, respectively). The use of intravenous sedatives was associated with a significant increase in adverse events for topical (1.20%) and injection anesthesia (1.18%), relative to topical anesthesia without intravenous sedation. The use of short-acting hypnotic agents with injection anesthesia was also associated with a significant increase in adverse events when used alone (1.40%) or in combination with opiates (1.75%), sedatives (2.65%), and with the combination of opiates and sedatives (4.04%). These differences remained after adjusting for age, gender, duration of surgery, and American Society of Anesthesiologists risk class. CONCLUSIONS: Adjuvant intravenous anesthetic agents used to decrease pain and alleviate anxiety are associated with increases in medical events. However, cataract surgery is a safe procedure with a low absolute risk of medical complications with either topical or injection anesthesia. Clinicians should weigh the risks and benefits of their use for individual patients.

Synthesis of the literature on the effectiveness of regional anesthesia for cataract surgery.

OBJECTIVE: To synthesize the findings of the randomized trials of regional anesthesia management strategies for cataract surgery. DESIGN: Literature review and analysis. METHOD: The authors performed a systematic search of the literature to identify all articles pertaining to regional anesthesia during cataract surgery on adults. One investigator abstracted the content of each article onto a custom-designed form. A second investigator corroborated the findings. The evidence supporting the anesthesia approaches was graded by consensus as good, fair, poor, or insufficient. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Evidence supporting the effectiveness of different forms of regional anesthesia. RESULTS: There was good evidence that retrobulbar and peribulbar blocks provide equivalent akinesia and pain control during cataract surgery. Additionally, sub-Tenon's blocks were at least as effective as retrobulbar and peribulbar blocks. There was good evidence that retrobulbar block provides better pain control during surgery than topical anesthesia, and there was fair evidence that peribulbar block provides better pain control than topical anesthesia. CONCLUSIONS: This synthesis of the literature demonstrates that currently used approaches to anesthesia management provide adequate pain control for successful cataract surgery, but there is some variation in the effectiveness of the most commonly used techniques. Data are needed on patient preferences to determine the optimal strategies for anesthesia management during cataract surgery.

The methodologic quality of clinical trials on regional anesthesia for cataract surgery.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the methodologic quality of published randomized trials of regional anesthesia management strategies for cataract surgery. DESIGN: Literature review and analysis. METHOD: We performed a systematic search of the literature to identify all articles pertaining to regional anesthesia for cataract surgery on adults. Overall quality scores and scores for individual methodologic domains were based on the evaluations of two investigators experienced in methodologic research who independently reviewed all relevant articles using a quality abstraction form. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Study quality in each of five domains: representativeness, bias and confounding, intervention description, outcomes and follow-up, and statistical quality and interpretation. RESULTS: Eighty-two randomized clinical trials were identified with a mean overall quality score of 44%. The mean domain scores ranged from 37% for representativeness to 58% for outcomes and follow-up. Forty percent or fewer studies received the maximum score for reporting the setting, the population, and the start and end dates; describing the inclusion and exclusion criteria; adequately randomizing subjects; and adequately masking individuals participating in the study. Key outcomes were often inadequately reported, including the distribution of patient-reported pain scores and the mean surgical time. CONCLUSIONS: Greater attention to methodologic quality and detailed reporting of study results will improve the ability of readers to interpret the results of clinical trials assessing regional anesthesia for cataract surgery.

Developing a health-related quality-of-life measure for end-stage renal disease: The CHOICE Health Experience Questionnaire.

The Choices for Healthy Outcomes in Caring for End-Stage Renal Disease ([ESRD] CHOICE) Study was designed to evaluate the effectiveness of alternative dialysis prescriptions. As part of CHOICE, we developed an instrument for measuring health-related quality of life (HRQOL) for patients with ESRD that would complement the Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short-Form Survey (SF-36) and be sensitive to differences in dialysis modality (hemodialysis [HD] and peritoneal dialysis [PD]) and dialysis dose. The selection of HRQOL domains to be included was based on: (1) a structured literature review of 47 articles describing 53 different instruments; (2) content analysis of five focus groups with HD and PD patients, nephrologists, and other providers; (3) a survey of 110 dialysis providers about features of different modalities that affect patient HRQOL; and (4) a semistructured survey of 25 patients with ESRD on the effects of dialysis on functioning and HRQOL. To help prioritize domains and items identified by these methods, a representative sample of 136 dialysis patients rated each item for frequency and bother. A panel of nephrologists provided advice about the salience of items to modality or dose. Items and scales were selected with a preference for existing measures tested in patients with ESRD and were tested for reliability and validity. The first four steps yielded 22 HRQOL domains that included 96 items: 8 generic domains in the SF-36 (health perceptions, physical, social, physical and emotional role function, pain, mental health, and energy); 8 additional generic domains (cognitive functioning, sexual functioning, sleep, work, recreation, travel, finances, and general quality of life); and 6 ESRD-specific domains (diet, freedom, time, body image, dialysis access [catheters and/or vascular], and symptoms). New items were developed or adapted to assess ESRD-specific domains. Scales for these items showed adequate internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha > 0.70, except for time [alpha = 0.57] and quality of life [alpha = 0.68]), as well as convergent and discriminant construct validity in a sample of 928 patients. The final questionnaire included 21 domains (time was deleted) and 83 items. We have designed a patient-centered instrument, the CHOICE Health Experience Questionnaire, that addresses domains that may be sensitive to differences in dialysis modality and dose and shows evidence for reliability and validity as a measure of HRQOL in ESRD.

Injectable versus topical anesthesia for cataract surgery: patient perceptions of pain and side effects. The Study of Medical Testing for Cataract Surgery study team.

OBJECTIVE: To compare patient reports of intraoperative pain and postoperative side effects by different anesthesia strategies for cataract surgery. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. PARTICIPANTS: Men and women 50 years of age and older undergoing 19,250 cataract surgeries at nine centers in the United States and Canada from June 1995 through June 1997. INTERVENTION: Topical anesthesia or anesthesia with injection, with or without sedatives, opioid analgesia, hypnotics, and diphenhydramine (Benadryl). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Patient ratings of intraoperative pain, satisfaction with pain management, and early postoperative side effects (drowsiness, nausea, vomiting, or a combination thereof). RESULTS: Twenty-six percent of surgeries were performed using topical anesthesia alone, and the remainder were performed with peribulbar, retrobulbar, or facial nerve block, or a combination thereof. Local anesthesia by injection with sedatives and diphenhydramine resulted in the lowest reporting of any intraoperative pain (1.3%), with postoperative drowsiness (9.6%) and nausea, vomiting, or both (1.5%) comparable with those administered topical anesthesia alone. Among those receiving topical anesthesia, use of sedatives and opioids reduced reports of any pain during surgery by 56% (95% confidence interval [CI], 34%, 70%), but increased nausea and vomiting (odds ratio, 2.27; 95% CI, 1.26, 4.09) compared with those administered topical anesthesia alone, after adjusting for age, gender, race, American Society of Anesthesiologists risk class, self-reported health status, and duration of surgery. Among those receiving local injections, use of opioids reduced reports of any pain among those receiving sedatives by 37% (95% CI, 15%, 54%), but did not increase postoperative side effects. The use of diphenhydramine among those receiving sedatives decreased reports of any pain by 59% (95% CI, 33%, 75%) and also reduced drowsiness and nausea and vomiting by 57% (95% CI, 48%, 65%) and by 60% (95% CI, 36%, 75%), respectively. Use of hypnotics with sedatives was associated with increased reports of any pain during surgery and increased nausea and vomiting after surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Patient reports of any pain during cataract surgery (5%) and postoperative side effects (16% drowsiness and 4% nausea and vomiting) were low, but varied by anesthesia strategy. Patient perceptions of pain and side effects can be helpful in guiding the appropriate choice of anesthesia strategy.

Cataract surgical techniques. Preferences and underlying beliefs.

To characterize the intraoperative procedures employed by cataract surgeons in the United States and the beliefs underlying the practices, a standardized questionnaire was sent to a systematic random sample of members of the American Academy of Ophthalmology in 1992. Of 667 surveyed ophthalmologists, 550 completed the questionnaire (response rate, 82.5%). Phacoemulsification was used for more than 75% of routine cataract surgery by 46% of respondents, whereas standard extracapsular surgery was used for more than 75% of routine cataract surgery by 41% of respondents. Preferential use of phacoemulsification was independently associated with more recent graduation from medical school and higher reported annual surgical volume. Continuous tear capsulotomy was employed by 52% of ophthalmologists. Preference for this technique was independently associated with both the use of phacoemulsification and higher annual surgical volume. Seventy-one percent of respondents used retrobulbar anesthesia, whereas 28% used peribulbar anesthesia. Use of peribulbar anesthesia was independently associated with both greater surgical volume and performance of surgery in an ambulatory surgical center. Beliefs regarding comparative safety and effectiveness were reported to influence surgeons' preferences strongly among all of the competing techniques studied. Those performing phacoemulsification, in comparison with those performing extracapsular cataract extraction, reported that the expectation of reduced astigmatism and shorter recovery time strongly influenced their choice of procedure. Variation in preferred intraoperative techniques is substantial for cataract surgery and the beliefs that underlie the preferences. Such variation highlights the need to determine which techniques maximize patient outcomes and are most cost-effective.