Attitudes and understanding of premium intraocular lenses in cataract surgery: a public health sector patient survey

• Published in: Eye (London) Vol. 38; no. 1; pp. 76 - 81
• Main Authors: Jameel, Ashmal, Dong, Lucia, Lam, Chun Fung Jeffrey, Mahmood, Hana, Naderi, Khayam, Low, Sancy, Azan, Elodie, Verma, Seema, Robbie, Scott, Bhogal, Mani, O’Brart, David
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: London Nature Publishing Group UK 01.01.2024; Nature Publishing Group
• Subjects: 692/699/3161/3168; 692/699/3161/3174; Cataract; Cataract Extraction; Contact lenses; Eye surgery; Humans; Intraocular lenses; Laboratory Medicine; Lenses, Intraocular; Medicine; Medicine & Public Health; Ophthalmology; Patients; Pharmaceutical Sciences/Technology; Public Health; Reading; Surgery; Surgical Oncology; Surveys; Visual Acuity; United Kingdom > UK
• ISSN: 0950-222X; 1476-5454
• DOI: 10.1038/s41433-023-02633-6

Objectives To investigate patient understanding of, and attitudes to, premium (toric, extended depth of focus/multifocal) intraocular lenses (premIOLs) in public health sector patients undergoing cataract surgery (CS) in the UK. Methods A 12 question survey with Likert scale questions was designed, to assess patient attitudes to post-operative spectacle dependence, refractive target and desirability of spectacle independence whilst considering possible complications of dysphotopsias and need for premIOL exchange/adjustment. Results 360 surveys were collected. CS had not been performed in 66.5%. Separate spectacles were worn for reading and distance in 28.8%, 19.2% had varifocals, 11.2% bifocals, 22.9% reading glasses only and 1.6% computer glasses only. Contact lenses were not worn in 95.7%. Only 41.6% were drivers. Most patients (85.8%) did not mind wearing glasses after CS, with 78.9% preferring reading glasses, compared with 29.7% preferring distance glasses. Most patients (75.3%) were not familiar with premIOLs, with 58.9% not willing to consider them in the context of a 2% risk of debilitating dysphotopsia and 54.2% rejecting a 5% risk of second surgery. Conclusions There is a lack of awareness of premIOLs in public health sector (NHS) patients in the UK, suggesting limitations in the “fully informed” consent process for CS. Most NHS CS patients are currently willing to wear spectacles after CS, especially reading glasses. There is reluctance in such patients to consider premIOLs on a background of small risks of debilitating dysphotopsias and increased risks of a second operation.