The Royal College of Ophthalmologists’ National Ophthalmology Database study of cataract surgery: report 16, influence of remuneration model on choice of intraocular lens in the UK
Background/Objectives Cataract surgery with intraocular lens (IOL) implantation is one of the most commonly performed surgeries worldwide. Within the UK, publicly funded cataract surgery is remunerated by two models: (1) “block contract” (BC), which commissions organisations to deliver whole service...
Saved in:
Published in | Eye (London) Vol. 37; no. 18; pp. 3854 - 3860 |
---|---|
Main Authors | , , , |
Format | Journal Article |
Language | English |
Published |
London
Nature Publishing Group UK
01.12.2023
Nature Publishing Group |
Subjects | |
Online Access | Get full text |
ISSN | 0950-222X 1476-5454 1476-5454 |
DOI | 10.1038/s41433-023-02665-y |
Cover
Loading…
Abstract | Background/Objectives
Cataract surgery with intraocular lens (IOL) implantation is one of the most commonly performed surgeries worldwide. Within the UK, publicly funded cataract surgery is remunerated by two models: (1) “block contract” (BC), which commissions organisations to deliver whole service pathways without considering specific activity items; or (2) “payment by results” (PbR), which pays a tariff price for each procedure. This study aimed to examine the association between remuneration model and the cost and types of IOL used.
Subjects/Methods
Cataract operations recorded on the Royal College of Ophthalmologists’ National Ophthalmology Database were included, with additional data collected for remuneration model from NHS England and cost of IOL from the NHS Spend Comparison Service.
Results
We included 907,052 cataract operations from 87 centres. The majority of operations were performed in PbR centres (456 198, 50.3%), followed by BC centres (240 641, 26.5%) and mixed models centres (210 213, 23.2%). The mean price of hydrophobic (
n
= 7) and hydrophilic IOLs (
n
= 5) were £45.72 and £42.86, respectively. Hydrophobic IOLs were predominantly used (650 633, 71.7%) and were significantly more commonly used in centres remunerated by BC (96.5% vs. 3.5%) than those by PbR (65.7% vs. 34.3%) when compared to hydrophilic IOLs (
p
< 0.001).
Conclusions
This study demonstrated that the IOL choice may be perversely incentivised by the IOL cost and remuneration model. Although hydrophobic IOLs are more expensive at the point of surgery, their potential longer-term cost-effectiveness due to reduced requirement for YAG capsulotomy should be considered. |
---|---|
AbstractList | Cataract surgery with intraocular lens (IOL) implantation is one of the most commonly performed surgeries worldwide. Within the UK, publicly funded cataract surgery is remunerated by two models: (1) "block contract" (BC), which commissions organisations to deliver whole service pathways without considering specific activity items; or (2) "payment by results" (PbR), which pays a tariff price for each procedure. This study aimed to examine the association between remuneration model and the cost and types of IOL used.
Cataract operations recorded on the Royal College of Ophthalmologists' National Ophthalmology Database were included, with additional data collected for remuneration model from NHS England and cost of IOL from the NHS Spend Comparison Service.
We included 907,052 cataract operations from 87 centres. The majority of operations were performed in PbR centres (456 198, 50.3%), followed by BC centres (240 641, 26.5%) and mixed models centres (210 213, 23.2%). The mean price of hydrophobic (n = 7) and hydrophilic IOLs (n = 5) were £45.72 and £42.86, respectively. Hydrophobic IOLs were predominantly used (650 633, 71.7%) and were significantly more commonly used in centres remunerated by BC (96.5% vs. 3.5%) than those by PbR (65.7% vs. 34.3%) when compared to hydrophilic IOLs (p < 0.001).
This study demonstrated that the IOL choice may be perversely incentivised by the IOL cost and remuneration model. Although hydrophobic IOLs are more expensive at the point of surgery, their potential longer-term cost-effectiveness due to reduced requirement for YAG capsulotomy should be considered. Background/Objectives Cataract surgery with intraocular lens (IOL) implantation is one of the most commonly performed surgeries worldwide. Within the UK, publicly funded cataract surgery is remunerated by two models: (1) “block contract” (BC), which commissions organisations to deliver whole service pathways without considering specific activity items; or (2) “payment by results” (PbR), which pays a tariff price for each procedure. This study aimed to examine the association between remuneration model and the cost and types of IOL used. Subjects/Methods Cataract operations recorded on the Royal College of Ophthalmologists’ National Ophthalmology Database were included, with additional data collected for remuneration model from NHS England and cost of IOL from the NHS Spend Comparison Service. Results We included 907,052 cataract operations from 87 centres. The majority of operations were performed in PbR centres (456 198, 50.3%), followed by BC centres (240 641, 26.5%) and mixed models centres (210 213, 23.2%). The mean price of hydrophobic ( n = 7) and hydrophilic IOLs ( n = 5) were £45.72 and £42.86, respectively. Hydrophobic IOLs were predominantly used (650 633, 71.7%) and were significantly more commonly used in centres remunerated by BC (96.5% vs. 3.5%) than those by PbR (65.7% vs. 34.3%) when compared to hydrophilic IOLs ( p < 0.001). Conclusions This study demonstrated that the IOL choice may be perversely incentivised by the IOL cost and remuneration model. Although hydrophobic IOLs are more expensive at the point of surgery, their potential longer-term cost-effectiveness due to reduced requirement for YAG capsulotomy should be considered. Cataract surgery with intraocular lens (IOL) implantation is one of the most commonly performed surgeries worldwide. Within the UK, publicly funded cataract surgery is remunerated by two models: (1) "block contract" (BC), which commissions organisations to deliver whole service pathways without considering specific activity items; or (2) "payment by results" (PbR), which pays a tariff price for each procedure. This study aimed to examine the association between remuneration model and the cost and types of IOL used.BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVESCataract surgery with intraocular lens (IOL) implantation is one of the most commonly performed surgeries worldwide. Within the UK, publicly funded cataract surgery is remunerated by two models: (1) "block contract" (BC), which commissions organisations to deliver whole service pathways without considering specific activity items; or (2) "payment by results" (PbR), which pays a tariff price for each procedure. This study aimed to examine the association between remuneration model and the cost and types of IOL used.Cataract operations recorded on the Royal College of Ophthalmologists' National Ophthalmology Database were included, with additional data collected for remuneration model from NHS England and cost of IOL from the NHS Spend Comparison Service.SUBJECTS/METHODSCataract operations recorded on the Royal College of Ophthalmologists' National Ophthalmology Database were included, with additional data collected for remuneration model from NHS England and cost of IOL from the NHS Spend Comparison Service.We included 907,052 cataract operations from 87 centres. The majority of operations were performed in PbR centres (456 198, 50.3%), followed by BC centres (240 641, 26.5%) and mixed models centres (210 213, 23.2%). The mean price of hydrophobic (n = 7) and hydrophilic IOLs (n = 5) were £45.72 and £42.86, respectively. Hydrophobic IOLs were predominantly used (650 633, 71.7%) and were significantly more commonly used in centres remunerated by BC (96.5% vs. 3.5%) than those by PbR (65.7% vs. 34.3%) when compared to hydrophilic IOLs (p < 0.001).RESULTSWe included 907,052 cataract operations from 87 centres. The majority of operations were performed in PbR centres (456 198, 50.3%), followed by BC centres (240 641, 26.5%) and mixed models centres (210 213, 23.2%). The mean price of hydrophobic (n = 7) and hydrophilic IOLs (n = 5) were £45.72 and £42.86, respectively. Hydrophobic IOLs were predominantly used (650 633, 71.7%) and were significantly more commonly used in centres remunerated by BC (96.5% vs. 3.5%) than those by PbR (65.7% vs. 34.3%) when compared to hydrophilic IOLs (p < 0.001).This study demonstrated that the IOL choice may be perversely incentivised by the IOL cost and remuneration model. Although hydrophobic IOLs are more expensive at the point of surgery, their potential longer-term cost-effectiveness due to reduced requirement for YAG capsulotomy should be considered.CONCLUSIONSThis study demonstrated that the IOL choice may be perversely incentivised by the IOL cost and remuneration model. Although hydrophobic IOLs are more expensive at the point of surgery, their potential longer-term cost-effectiveness due to reduced requirement for YAG capsulotomy should be considered. Background/ObjectivesCataract surgery with intraocular lens (IOL) implantation is one of the most commonly performed surgeries worldwide. Within the UK, publicly funded cataract surgery is remunerated by two models: (1) “block contract” (BC), which commissions organisations to deliver whole service pathways without considering specific activity items; or (2) “payment by results” (PbR), which pays a tariff price for each procedure. This study aimed to examine the association between remuneration model and the cost and types of IOL used.Subjects/MethodsCataract operations recorded on the Royal College of Ophthalmologists’ National Ophthalmology Database were included, with additional data collected for remuneration model from NHS England and cost of IOL from the NHS Spend Comparison Service.ResultsWe included 907,052 cataract operations from 87 centres. The majority of operations were performed in PbR centres (456 198, 50.3%), followed by BC centres (240 641, 26.5%) and mixed models centres (210 213, 23.2%). The mean price of hydrophobic (n = 7) and hydrophilic IOLs (n = 5) were £45.72 and £42.86, respectively. Hydrophobic IOLs were predominantly used (650 633, 71.7%) and were significantly more commonly used in centres remunerated by BC (96.5% vs. 3.5%) than those by PbR (65.7% vs. 34.3%) when compared to hydrophilic IOLs (p < 0.001).ConclusionsThis study demonstrated that the IOL choice may be perversely incentivised by the IOL cost and remuneration model. Although hydrophobic IOLs are more expensive at the point of surgery, their potential longer-term cost-effectiveness due to reduced requirement for YAG capsulotomy should be considered. |
Author | Buchan, John C. Donachie, Paul H. J. Tatham, Andrew J. Ting, Darren S. J. |
Author_xml | – sequence: 1 givenname: Darren S. J. orcidid: 0000-0003-1081-1141 surname: Ting fullname: Ting, Darren S. J. organization: Birmingham and Midland Eye Centre, Academic Unit of Ophthalmology, Institute of Inflammation and Ageing, University of Birmingham, Academic Ophthalmology, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham – sequence: 2 givenname: Andrew J. orcidid: 0000-0003-0372-3100 surname: Tatham fullname: Tatham, Andrew J. organization: Princess Alexandra Eye Pavilion, Centre for Clinical Brain Sciences, University of Edinburgh – sequence: 3 givenname: Paul H. J. surname: Donachie fullname: Donachie, Paul H. J. organization: Gloucestershire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, The Royal College of Ophthalmologists’ National Ophthalmology Audit – sequence: 4 givenname: John C. orcidid: 0000-0003-1005-7011 surname: Buchan fullname: Buchan, John C. email: john.buchan@lshtm.ac.uk organization: The Royal College of Ophthalmologists’ National Ophthalmology Audit, International Centre for Eye Health, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust |
BackLink | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37563427$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed |
BookMark | eNp9Ustu1DAUtVARnRZ-gAWyxIYFAT9iJ2GD0PAUFZXQILGzPI4zceXYg-0gZcdv8CN8EF-CM2mhdNGFZeueh4_uvSfgyHmnAXiI0TOMaP08lriktEBkPpyzYroDVriseMFKVh6BFWoYKgghX4_BSYwXCGWwQvfAMa0YpyWpVuDXptfws5-khWtvrd5p6Dt4vu9TL-3grd-ZmOLvHz_hJ5mMd5l3HZzga5nkVkYNYxrbaRarXAlSJRjHsNNhegGD3vuQIOZPoXGdHbVTh2-CHkanw8EYDr7VFuaH6r1ZcONSkF6NVgZotYu5AFPO--XjfXC3kzbqB5f3Kdi8fbNZvy_Ozt99WL86K1RZsVRotCUUs6atGa9U1RHa1ZQq2dZNidGWb1VX4YYT0pVEt1ihSvJWIoSaUnU1o6fg5WK7H7eDbpWeA1mxD2aQYRJeGvE_4kwvdv67wIg3NWI4Ozy5dAj-26hjEoOJSlsrnfZjFKRmiCLOGM3UxzeoF34MueMzq6kxpxRXmfXoeqS_Wa5Gmgn1QlDBxxh0J5RJhxbnhMbmaGLeHrFsj8jbIw7bI6YsJTekV-63iugiipns8sD_xb5F9QeV1NxT |
CitedBy_id | crossref_primary_10_1038_s41433_023_02684_9 crossref_primary_10_1111_aos_16766 crossref_primary_10_1016_j_jcjo_2024_02_014 crossref_primary_10_1038_s41433_024_03344_2 crossref_primary_10_1186_s40942_024_00562_4 |
Cites_doi | 10.1016/j.ajo.2021.11.021 10.1080/09286580490888762 10.1186/s12886-017-0546-8 10.1016/j.ophtha.2013.10.002 10.1097/ICU.0b013e3283414284 10.1136/bmj.328.7446.969 10.1016/j.jcjo.2020.07.012 10.3389/fbioe.2022.913383 10.1016/j.jcrs.2018.12.004 10.1038/s41433-019-0630-9 10.3389/fdata.2023.1017420 10.1097/MD.0000000000008301 10.1016/j.jcrs.2007.12.024 10.1038/eye.2012.300 10.1016/S0140-6736(22)01839-6 10.1016/j.aopr.2021.100008 10.1038/s41433-018-0131-2 10.1371/journal.pone.0277093 10.4103/tjo.tjo_19_17 10.1016/j.jcrs.2017.09.001 10.1016/j.ophtha.2020.02.028 10.1038/s41433-022-02204-1 |
ContentType | Journal Article |
Copyright | The Author(s), under exclusive licence to The Royal College of Ophthalmologists 2023. Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law. 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to The Royal College of Ophthalmologists. |
Copyright_xml | – notice: The Author(s), under exclusive licence to The Royal College of Ophthalmologists 2023. Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law. – notice: 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to The Royal College of Ophthalmologists. |
DBID | AAYXX CITATION CGR CUY CVF ECM EIF NPM 3V. 7TK 7X7 7XB 88E 8AO 8FE 8FH 8FI 8FJ 8FK ABUWG AFKRA AZQEC BBNVY BENPR BHPHI CCPQU DWQXO FYUFA GHDGH GNUQQ HCIFZ K9. LK8 M0S M1P M7P PHGZM PHGZT PJZUB PKEHL PPXIY PQEST PQGLB PQQKQ PQUKI 7X8 5PM |
DOI | 10.1038/s41433-023-02665-y |
DatabaseName | CrossRef Medline MEDLINE MEDLINE (Ovid) MEDLINE MEDLINE PubMed ProQuest Central (Corporate) Neurosciences Abstracts Health & Medical Collection ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016) Medical Database (Alumni Edition) ProQuest Pharma Collection ProQuest SciTech Collection ProQuest Natural Science Collection Hospital Premium Collection Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition) ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016) ProQuest Central (Alumni) ProQuest Central UK/Ireland ProQuest Central Essentials - QC Biological Science Collection ProQuest Central Natural Science Collection ProQuest One ProQuest Central Korea Proquest Health Research Premium Collection Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni) ProQuest Central Student SciTech Premium Collection ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni) Biological Sciences Health & Medical Collection (Alumni) Medical Database Biological Science Database ProQuest Central Premium ProQuest One Academic (New) ProQuest Health & Medical Research Collection ProQuest One Academic Middle East (New) ProQuest One Health & Nursing ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE) ProQuest One Applied & Life Sciences ProQuest One Academic ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition MEDLINE - Academic PubMed Central (Full Participant titles) |
DatabaseTitle | CrossRef MEDLINE Medline Complete MEDLINE with Full Text PubMed MEDLINE (Ovid) ProQuest Central Student ProQuest One Academic Middle East (New) ProQuest Central Essentials ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni) ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition) SciTech Premium Collection ProQuest One Community College ProQuest One Health & Nursing ProQuest Natural Science Collection ProQuest Pharma Collection ProQuest Central ProQuest One Applied & Life Sciences ProQuest Health & Medical Research Collection Health Research Premium Collection Health and Medicine Complete (Alumni Edition) Natural Science Collection ProQuest Central Korea Health & Medical Research Collection Biological Science Collection ProQuest Central (New) ProQuest Medical Library (Alumni) ProQuest Biological Science Collection ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition ProQuest Hospital Collection Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni) Biological Science Database ProQuest SciTech Collection Neurosciences Abstracts ProQuest Hospital Collection (Alumni) ProQuest Health & Medical Complete ProQuest Medical Library ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition ProQuest One Academic ProQuest One Academic (New) ProQuest Central (Alumni) MEDLINE - Academic |
DatabaseTitleList | MEDLINE MEDLINE - Academic ProQuest Central Student |
Database_xml | – sequence: 1 dbid: NPM name: PubMed url: https://proxy.k.utb.cz/login?url=http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed sourceTypes: Index Database – sequence: 2 dbid: EIF name: MEDLINE url: https://proxy.k.utb.cz/login?url=https://www.webofscience.com/wos/medline/basic-search sourceTypes: Index Database – sequence: 3 dbid: BENPR name: ProQuest Central url: https://www.proquest.com/central sourceTypes: Aggregation Database |
DeliveryMethod | fulltext_linktorsrc |
Discipline | Medicine |
EISSN | 1476-5454 |
EndPage | 3860 |
ExternalDocumentID | PMC10698051 37563427 10_1038_s41433_023_02665_y |
Genre | Journal Article |
GeographicLocations | England United Kingdom--UK |
GeographicLocations_xml | – name: England – name: United Kingdom--UK |
GroupedDBID | --- -Q- .GJ 0R~ 29G 2WC 36B 39C 3O- 4.4 406 53G 5RE 6PF 70F 7X7 88E 8AO 8FI 8FJ 8R4 8R5 AACDK AANZL AASML AATNV AAWTL AAYZH ABAKF ABAWZ ABBRH ABCQX ABDBE ABFSG ABJNI ABLJU ABRTQ ABUWG ABZZP ACAOD ACGFS ACKTT ACPRK ACRQY ACSTC ACZOJ ADBBV AEFQL AEJRE AEMSY AENEX AEVLU AEXYK AEZWR AFBBN AFDZB AFFNX AFHIU AFKRA AFSHS AGAYW AGHAI AGQEE AHMBA AHSBF AHWEU AIGIU AILAN AIXLP AJRNO ALFFA ALIPV ALMA_UNASSIGNED_HOLDINGS AMYLF AOIJS ATHPR AXYYD AYFIA BAWUL BBNVY BENPR BHPHI BKKNO BPHCQ BVXVI CAG CCPQU COF CS3 DIK DNIVK DPUIP E3Z EBLON EBS EBX EE. EIOEI EJD EMB EMOBN F5P FDQFY FERAY FIGPU FIZPM FSGXE FYUFA GX1 HCIFZ HMCUK HYE HZ~ IWAJR JSO JZLTJ KQ8 L7B M1P M7P NQJWS O9- OK1 P2P PHGZM PHGZT PJZUB PPXIY PQGLB PQQKQ PROAC PSQYO Q2X RNS RNT RNTTT ROL RPM SNX SNYQT SOHCF SOJ SRMVM SV3 SWTZT TAOOD TBHMF TDRGL TR2 UKHRP W2D ZGI ZXP AAYXX CITATION CGR CUY CVF ECM EIF NPM 3V. 7TK 7XB 8FE 8FH 8FK AZQEC DWQXO GNUQQ K9. LK8 PKEHL PQEST PQUKI PUEGO 7X8 5PM |
ID | FETCH-LOGICAL-c475t-e0b23159d8567c7f23f833cad89410b6bcf719622f42ed1c07a6da00094cf853 |
IEDL.DBID | BENPR |
ISSN | 0950-222X 1476-5454 |
IngestDate | Thu Aug 21 18:36:06 EDT 2025 Thu Sep 04 19:05:07 EDT 2025 Sat Aug 23 14:25:40 EDT 2025 Mon Jul 21 06:07:34 EDT 2025 Tue Jul 01 03:00:42 EDT 2025 Thu Apr 24 22:50:24 EDT 2025 Mon Jul 21 06:08:34 EDT 2025 |
IsDoiOpenAccess | false |
IsOpenAccess | true |
IsPeerReviewed | true |
IsScholarly | true |
Issue | 18 |
Language | English |
License | 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to The Royal College of Ophthalmologists. |
LinkModel | DirectLink |
MergedId | FETCHMERGED-LOGICAL-c475t-e0b23159d8567c7f23f833cad89410b6bcf719622f42ed1c07a6da00094cf853 |
Notes | ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 14 content type line 23 |
ORCID | 0000-0003-0372-3100 0000-0003-1005-7011 0000-0003-1081-1141 |
OpenAccessLink | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/10698051 |
PMID | 37563427 |
PQID | 2898163317 |
PQPubID | 33647 |
PageCount | 7 |
ParticipantIDs | pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_10698051 proquest_miscellaneous_2850306553 proquest_journals_2898163317 pubmed_primary_37563427 crossref_citationtrail_10_1038_s41433_023_02665_y crossref_primary_10_1038_s41433_023_02665_y springer_journals_10_1038_s41433_023_02665_y |
ProviderPackageCode | CITATION AAYXX |
PublicationCentury | 2000 |
PublicationDate | 2023-12-01 |
PublicationDateYYYYMMDD | 2023-12-01 |
PublicationDate_xml | – month: 12 year: 2023 text: 2023-12-01 day: 01 |
PublicationDecade | 2020 |
PublicationPlace | London |
PublicationPlace_xml | – name: London – name: England |
PublicationSubtitle | The Scientific Journal of The Royal College of Ophthalmologists |
PublicationTitle | Eye (London) |
PublicationTitleAbbrev | Eye |
PublicationTitleAlternate | Eye (Lond) |
PublicationYear | 2023 |
Publisher | Nature Publishing Group UK Nature Publishing Group |
Publisher_xml | – name: Nature Publishing Group UK – name: Nature Publishing Group |
References | Ting, Rees, Ng, Allen, Steel (CR9) 2017; 43 Luo, Wang, Chen, Xu, Yin, Yao (CR11) 2022; 10 Nanavaty, Zukaite, Salvage (CR17) 2019; 45 Ursell, Dhariwal, O'Boyle, Khan, Venerus (CR19) 2020; 34 Grzybowski, Zemaitiene, Markeviciute, Tuuminen (CR22) 2022; 237 Ting, Deshmukh, Ting, Ang (CR2) 2023; 6 Lamoureux, Fenwick, Pesudovs, Tan (CR4) 2011; 22 Berdahl, Bala, Dhariwal, Rathi, Gupta (CR15) 2022; 17 CR12 Nanavaty, Spalton, Boyce, Brain, Marshall (CR16) 2008; 34 Srinivasan, Ting, Lyall (CR6) 2013; 27 Erie (CR7) 2014; 121 Ursell, Dhariwal, Majirska, Ender, Kalson-Ray, Venerus (CR18) 2018; 32 Salerno, Tiveron, Alió (CR8) 2017; 7 Chen, Xu, Chen, Yao (CR3) 2021; 1 Zhao, Yang, Li, Huang, Zhu (CR13) 2017; 96 Giers, Tandogan, Auffarth, Choi, Auerbach, Sel (CR20) 2017; 17 Ng, Ting, Thomas, Auffarth, Merz (CR21) 2021; 56 Cicinelli, Buchan, Nicholson, Varadaraj, Khanna (CR1) 2023; 401 Day, Burr, Bennett, Bunce, Doré, Rubin (CR10) 2020; 127 Muralikrishnan, Venkatesh, Prajna, Frick (CR5) 2004; 11 Dixon (CR14) 2004; 328 BC Giers (2665_CR20) 2017; 17 PG Ursell (2665_CR18) 2018; 32 MV Cicinelli (2665_CR1) 2023; 401 AC Day (2665_CR10) 2020; 127 JY Ng (2665_CR21) 2021; 56 R Muralikrishnan (2665_CR5) 2004; 11 J Dixon (2665_CR14) 2004; 328 LC Salerno (2665_CR8) 2017; 7 DSJ Ting (2665_CR9) 2017; 43 Y Zhao (2665_CR13) 2017; 96 S Srinivasan (2665_CR6) 2013; 27 MA Nanavaty (2665_CR17) 2019; 45 C Luo (2665_CR11) 2022; 10 J Berdahl (2665_CR15) 2022; 17 2665_CR12 A Grzybowski (2665_CR22) 2022; 237 PG Ursell (2665_CR19) 2020; 34 JC Erie (2665_CR7) 2014; 121 MA Nanavaty (2665_CR16) 2008; 34 DSJ Ting (2665_CR2) 2023; 6 X Chen (2665_CR3) 2021; 1 EL Lamoureux (2665_CR4) 2011; 22 37542172 - Eye (Lond). 2023 Dec;37(18):3712-3713. doi: 10.1038/s41433-023-02684-9 |
References_xml | – volume: 237 start-page: 139 year: 2022 end-page: 45 ident: CR22 article-title: Should we abandon hydrophilic intraocular lenses? publication-title: Am J Ophthalmol doi: 10.1016/j.ajo.2021.11.021 – volume: 11 start-page: 369 year: 2004 end-page: 80 ident: CR5 article-title: Economic cost of cataract surgery procedures in an established eye care centre in Southern India publication-title: Ophthalmic Epidemiol doi: 10.1080/09286580490888762 – volume: 17 year: 2017 ident: CR20 article-title: Hydrophilic intraocular lens opacification after posterior lamellar keratoplasty - a material analysis with special reference to optical quality assessment publication-title: BMC Ophthalmol doi: 10.1186/s12886-017-0546-8 – volume: 121 start-page: 2 year: 2014 end-page: 4 ident: CR7 article-title: Rising cataract surgery rates: demand and supply publication-title: Ophthalmology. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2013.10.002 – volume: 22 start-page: 19 year: 2011 end-page: 27 ident: CR4 article-title: The impact of cataract surgery on quality of life publication-title: Curr Opin Ophthalmol doi: 10.1097/ICU.0b013e3283414284 – volume: 328 start-page: 969 year: 2004 end-page: 70 ident: CR14 article-title: Payment by results-new financial flows in the NHS publication-title: BMJ. doi: 10.1136/bmj.328.7446.969 – volume: 56 start-page: e9 year: 2021 end-page: e11 ident: CR21 article-title: Opacification of hydrophilic acrylic intraocular lens following vitreoretinal surgery: a clinicopathological report publication-title: Can J Ophthalmol doi: 10.1016/j.jcjo.2020.07.012 – volume: 10 start-page: 913383 year: 2022 ident: CR11 article-title: Recent advances of intraocular lens materials and surface modification in cataract surgery publication-title: Front Bioeng Biotechnol doi: 10.3389/fbioe.2022.913383 – ident: CR12 – volume: 45 start-page: 847 year: 2019 end-page: 53 ident: CR17 article-title: Edge profile of commercially available square-edged intraocular lenses: Part 2 publication-title: J Cataract Refract Surg doi: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2018.12.004 – volume: 34 start-page: 960 year: 2020 end-page: 8 ident: CR19 article-title: 5 year incidence of YAG capsulotomy and PCO after cataract surgery with single-piece monofocal intraocular lenses: a real-world evidence study of 20,763 eyes publication-title: Eye doi: 10.1038/s41433-019-0630-9 – volume: 6 start-page: 1017420 year: 2023 ident: CR2 article-title: Big data in corneal diseases and cataract: current applications and future directions publication-title: Front Big Data doi: 10.3389/fdata.2023.1017420 – volume: 96 start-page: e8301 year: 2017 ident: CR13 article-title: Comparison of hydrophobic and hydrophilic intraocular lens in preventing posterior capsule opacification after cataract surgery: an updated meta-analysis publication-title: Medicine doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000008301 – volume: 34 start-page: 677 year: 2008 end-page: 86 ident: CR16 article-title: Edge profile of commercially available square-edged intraocular lenses publication-title: J Cataract Refract Surg doi: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2007.12.024 – volume: 27 start-page: 531 year: 2013 end-page: 7 ident: CR6 article-title: Implantation of a customized toric intraocular lens for correction of post-keratoplasty astigmatism publication-title: Eye doi: 10.1038/eye.2012.300 – volume: 401 start-page: 377 year: 2023 end-page: 89 ident: CR1 article-title: Cataracts publication-title: Lancet doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(22)01839-6 – volume: 1 start-page: 100008 year: 2021 ident: CR3 article-title: Cataract: advances in surgery and whether surgery remains the only treatment in future publication-title: Adv Ophthalmol Pract Res doi: 10.1016/j.aopr.2021.100008 – volume: 32 start-page: 1579 year: 2018 end-page: 89 ident: CR18 article-title: Three-year incidence of Nd:YAG capsulotomy and posterior capsule opacification and its relationship to monofocal acrylic IOL biomaterial: a UK Real World Evidence study publication-title: Eye doi: 10.1038/s41433-018-0131-2 – volume: 17 start-page: e0277093 year: 2022 ident: CR15 article-title: Cost-benefit analysis of a trifocal intraocular lens versus a monofocal intraocular lens from the patient’s perspective in the United States publication-title: PLoS ONE doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0277093 – volume: 7 start-page: 179 year: 2017 end-page: 84 ident: CR8 article-title: Multifocal intraocular lenses: types, outcomes, complications and how to solve them publication-title: Taiwan J Ophthalmol doi: 10.4103/tjo.tjo_19_17 – volume: 43 start-page: 1135 year: 2017 end-page: 9 ident: CR9 article-title: Effect of high-vacuum setting on phacoemulsification efficiency publication-title: J Cataract Refract Surg doi: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2017.09.001 – volume: 127 start-page: 1012 year: 2020 end-page: 9 ident: CR10 article-title: Femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery versus phacoemulsification cataract surgery (FACT): a randomized noninferiority trial publication-title: Ophthalmology. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2020.02.028 – volume: 10 start-page: 913383 year: 2022 ident: 2665_CR11 publication-title: Front Bioeng Biotechnol doi: 10.3389/fbioe.2022.913383 – volume: 56 start-page: e9 year: 2021 ident: 2665_CR21 publication-title: Can J Ophthalmol doi: 10.1016/j.jcjo.2020.07.012 – volume: 34 start-page: 960 year: 2020 ident: 2665_CR19 publication-title: Eye doi: 10.1038/s41433-019-0630-9 – volume: 96 start-page: e8301 year: 2017 ident: 2665_CR13 publication-title: Medicine doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000008301 – volume: 34 start-page: 677 year: 2008 ident: 2665_CR16 publication-title: J Cataract Refract Surg doi: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2007.12.024 – volume: 237 start-page: 139 year: 2022 ident: 2665_CR22 publication-title: Am J Ophthalmol doi: 10.1016/j.ajo.2021.11.021 – volume: 121 start-page: 2 year: 2014 ident: 2665_CR7 publication-title: Ophthalmology. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2013.10.002 – volume: 27 start-page: 531 year: 2013 ident: 2665_CR6 publication-title: Eye doi: 10.1038/eye.2012.300 – volume: 1 start-page: 100008 year: 2021 ident: 2665_CR3 publication-title: Adv Ophthalmol Pract Res doi: 10.1016/j.aopr.2021.100008 – volume: 32 start-page: 1579 year: 2018 ident: 2665_CR18 publication-title: Eye doi: 10.1038/s41433-018-0131-2 – volume: 17 year: 2017 ident: 2665_CR20 publication-title: BMC Ophthalmol doi: 10.1186/s12886-017-0546-8 – volume: 401 start-page: 377 year: 2023 ident: 2665_CR1 publication-title: Lancet doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(22)01839-6 – volume: 17 start-page: e0277093 year: 2022 ident: 2665_CR15 publication-title: PLoS ONE doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0277093 – volume: 45 start-page: 847 year: 2019 ident: 2665_CR17 publication-title: J Cataract Refract Surg doi: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2018.12.004 – volume: 7 start-page: 179 year: 2017 ident: 2665_CR8 publication-title: Taiwan J Ophthalmol doi: 10.4103/tjo.tjo_19_17 – ident: 2665_CR12 doi: 10.1038/s41433-022-02204-1 – volume: 43 start-page: 1135 year: 2017 ident: 2665_CR9 publication-title: J Cataract Refract Surg doi: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2017.09.001 – volume: 127 start-page: 1012 year: 2020 ident: 2665_CR10 publication-title: Ophthalmology. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2020.02.028 – volume: 328 start-page: 969 year: 2004 ident: 2665_CR14 publication-title: BMJ. doi: 10.1136/bmj.328.7446.969 – volume: 6 start-page: 1017420 year: 2023 ident: 2665_CR2 publication-title: Front Big Data doi: 10.3389/fdata.2023.1017420 – volume: 22 start-page: 19 year: 2011 ident: 2665_CR4 publication-title: Curr Opin Ophthalmol doi: 10.1097/ICU.0b013e3283414284 – volume: 11 start-page: 369 year: 2004 ident: 2665_CR5 publication-title: Ophthalmic Epidemiol doi: 10.1080/09286580490888762 – reference: 37542172 - Eye (Lond). 2023 Dec;37(18):3712-3713. doi: 10.1038/s41433-023-02684-9 |
SSID | ssj0014770 |
Score | 2.4103827 |
Snippet | Background/Objectives
Cataract surgery with intraocular lens (IOL) implantation is one of the most commonly performed surgeries worldwide. Within the UK,... Cataract surgery with intraocular lens (IOL) implantation is one of the most commonly performed surgeries worldwide. Within the UK, publicly funded cataract... Background/ObjectivesCataract surgery with intraocular lens (IOL) implantation is one of the most commonly performed surgeries worldwide. Within the UK,... |
SourceID | pubmedcentral proquest pubmed crossref springer |
SourceType | Open Access Repository Aggregation Database Index Database Enrichment Source Publisher |
StartPage | 3854 |
SubjectTerms | 692/699/3161/3168 692/700/228 692/700/3934 Cataract Cataract Extraction Cataracts England Eye surgery Humans Hydrophobicity Intraocular lenses Laboratory Medicine Lens Implantation, Intraocular - methods Lenses, Intraocular Medical personnel Medicine Medicine & Public Health Ophthalmologists Ophthalmology Pharmaceutical Sciences/Technology Postoperative Complications Remuneration Surgery Surgical Oncology |
Title | The Royal College of Ophthalmologists’ National Ophthalmology Database study of cataract surgery: report 16, influence of remuneration model on choice of intraocular lens in the UK |
URI | https://link.springer.com/article/10.1038/s41433-023-02665-y https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37563427 https://www.proquest.com/docview/2898163317 https://www.proquest.com/docview/2850306553 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/PMC10698051 |
Volume | 37 |
hasFullText | 1 |
inHoldings | 1 |
isFullTextHit | |
isPrint | |
link | http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwfV3NbtQwELboVkJcEP8ESmUkbjRq4tixwwXx06oCURBqpb1Fju1oV9omS7N72BuvwYvwQDwJM46TaqnoIVIU20msGc98nhnPEPJKcGNdpavYcmVjzgsbK1PUsWEsrVyVo-sKoy1O85Nz_mkqpsHg1oWwykEmekFtW4M28kPYGCjADqDu3i5_xFg1Cr2roYTGDtkFEazEhOy-Pzr99n30I3Dpy8UBjkhi0ITTcGwmydRhxwEqoA8TrzwX8WZbNV3Dm9fDJv_xnXqVdHyP3A1Ykr7riX-f3HLNA3L7S_CWPyS_gQeotw_QYB-gbU2_LmermV5ctP3hn-7Pz180ZMdebDVu6Ee90qjmqE9Ci4PR2oPnqmjXH6d-Q3unA03zAzofCp5gz0t3scaM1vhi6uvtULgBYTvv2-c4u9ZHwVLQfB08oABG6fnnR-Ts-Ojsw0kc6jTEhkuxil1SAUoUhVUil0bWLKtVlhltVcHTpMorU0tY6IzVnDmbmkTq3Gof1GhqgAuPyaRpG_eUUKadMpVlrrYZt4WqQL5IWQuWWM1skkckHShUmpDDHEtpLErvS89U2VO1BKqWnqrlJiKvxzHLPoPHjb33BsKXYTV35RXvReTl2AzrEJ0runHtGvsI3H4JkUXkSc8n4-cyKfKMMxittjho7IA5vrdbmvnM5_qGHXuhQHBG5GBgtqv_-v80nt08jefkDkPG92E5e2Syuly7FwCuVtU-2ZFTuR_W0V_c-icI |
linkProvider | ProQuest |
linkToHtml | http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwtV3bbtMwGLamTQJuEOcVBhgJrli0xLEdBwkhYJs6uhWEOql3UWI7aqWuKUsq1Dteg4fglgfiSfh_5zCVid3tolJU22mt__TZ_4mQl4JrY7M08wxXxuM8Np7Sce5pxoLMZhJdVxhtMZT9U_5pLMYb5FebC4Nhla1OdIraFBrvyPfgYKAAO4C5e7f45mHXKPSuti00arYY2NV3OLKVb4_2gb6vGDs8GH3se01XAU_zSFSe9TPANCI2SshIRzkLcxWGOjUq5oGfyUznEbAlYzln1gTaj1JpUheCp3OFTSJA428ByohBiLY-HAy_fO3cFjxy3ekAtvgeGN5xk6Xjh2qv5IBM0GWKHymFt1q3hJfg7eUozX9ctc4CHt4htxvoSt_XvHaXbNj5PXLjpHHO3ye_geWou46gzXUELXL6eTGpJunsrKhzjco_P37Sphj3bG1wRffTKkWrSl3NW1yMl0uYxkXLOnv7Da19HDSQu3Ta9lfBmef2bIkFtPHF1LX3ofAAun1aj09xd4ULuqVgaEv4ggL2paeDB2R0HQR8SDbnxdxuE8pSq3RmmM1NyE2sMlBnUZQL5puUGV_2SNBSKNFNyXTs3DFLnOs-VElN1QSomjiqJqseed2tWdQFQ66cvdMSPmmUR5lcsHqPvOiGQezRl5PObbHEOQJPe0KEPfKo5pPu58JIyJAzWK3WOKibgCXF10fm04krLR74Mlagp3tkt2W2i__1_208vnobz8nN_ujkODk-Gg6ekFsMhcBFBO2Qzep8aZ8CrquyZ400UZJcs_z-Bf0sYaw |
linkToPdf | http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwtV1fb9MwELemTpp4QYy_gQFGgicWNXFsx0FCCOiqjUKZ0Cb1LUpsR63UNWVpNfWNr8EXQeLr8Em4c5JOZWJve4gUxXYS6853Z__uDyEvBdfG5lnuG66Mz3lifKWTwteMhbnNJUJX6G0xlIen_NNIjLbI7zYWBt0qW5noBLUpNZ6Rd2FjoMB2AHXXLRq3iONe_938u48VpBBpbctp1CwysKsL2L5Vb496QOtXjPUPTj4e-k2FAV_zWCx8G-Rg34jEKCFjHRcsKlQU6cyohIdBLnNdxMCijBWcWRPqIM6kyZw7ni4UFowA6b8dg1JUHbL94WB4_G0NYfDYVaoDEybwQQmPmoidIFLdioOVgvApXlIKf7WpFa-Yulc9Nv-BbZ027N8htxszlr6v-W6XbNnZXbLzpQHq75FfwH7UHU3Q5miClgX9Oh8vxtn0rKzjjqo_P37SJjH3dKNxRXvZIkMNS13-WxyMB00Y0kWrOpL7Da3xDhrKfTppa61gz3N7tsRk2vhi6kr9ULgBOT-p2yc4u9I54FJQuhU8oGAH09PBfXJyEwR8QDqzcmYfEcoyq3RumC1MxE2ichBtcVwIFpiMmUB6JGwplOomfTpW8ZimDsaPVFpTNQWqpo6q6cojr9dj5nXykGt777WETxtBUqWXbO-RF-tmEAGI62QzWy6xj8CdnxCRRx7WfLL-XBQLGXEGo9UGB607YHrxzZbZZOzSjIeBTBTIbI_st8x2-V__n8bj66fxnOzAuk0_Hw0HT8gthmvAOQftkc7ifGmfgom3yJ81i4mS9IaX719LeWXY |
openUrl | ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The+Royal+College+of+Ophthalmologists%E2%80%99+National+Ophthalmology+Database+study+of+cataract+surgery%3A+report+16%2C+influence+of+remuneration+model+on+choice+of+intraocular+lens+in+the+UK&rft.jtitle=Eye+%28London%29&rft.au=Ting%2C+Darren+S.+J.&rft.au=Tatham%2C+Andrew+J.&rft.au=Donachie%2C+Paul+H.+J.&rft.au=Buchan%2C+John+C.&rft.date=2023-12-01&rft.issn=0950-222X&rft.eissn=1476-5454&rft.volume=37&rft.issue=18&rft.spage=3854&rft.epage=3860&rft_id=info:doi/10.1038%2Fs41433-023-02665-y&rft.externalDBID=n%2Fa&rft.externalDocID=10_1038_s41433_023_02665_y |
thumbnail_l | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/lc.gif&issn=0950-222X&client=summon |
thumbnail_m | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/mc.gif&issn=0950-222X&client=summon |
thumbnail_s | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/sc.gif&issn=0950-222X&client=summon |