Skip to main content
Log in

Clinical outcomes and costs of cataract surgery performed by planned ECCE and phacoemulsification

  • Published:
International Ophthalmology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose: To compare clinical outcomes and costs of cataract surgery between patients operated with standard extracapsular extraction (ECCE) and those undergoing phacoemulsification. Setting: Patients from the Ophthalmology Department of a teaching hospital in Barcelona (Spain) scheduled for cataract surgery, not combined with any other ophthalmic procedure. Methods: A retrospective analysis has been performed on a database of 1046 patients undergoing ECCE and phacoemulsification. The outcome measures used were: surgical complications, visual acuity and costs of surgery and of follow-up. Overall rate of all complications and postoperative visual acuity were compared between the two groups, adjusting for age, preoperative visual acuity, medical and ocular comorbidity. Results: 31.9% of the patients (334) underwent phacoemulsification, and 68.1% (712) underwent ECCE. Patients undergoing phacoemulsification presented a frequency of intra- and postoperative complications lower than those undergoing ECCE (odds ratio 0.57, 95%Cl 0.37–0.87 and 0.66, 95%Cl 0.46–0.96, respectively), specifically for intraoperative iris trauma (3.1% vs 0.3%, p = 0.004), residual posterior capsular opacity (2% vs 0.3%, p = 0.035) and postoperative corneal edema (7.4% vs 3.6%, p = 0.016). Costs of intervention and follow-up were lower for phacoemulsification compared with ECCE (23.9% and 14%, respectively). But global costs were slightly higher for phacoemulsification (4.87%), due to supply costs, which were more than twice those ofECCE. Conclusions: Phacoemulsification, when performed by an experienced surgeon, has better clinical outcomes than planned extracapsular extraction, and costs may be lower since supply costs are expected to decrease as the phacoemulsification technique becomes more widespread.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Leaming DV. Practice styles and preferences of ASCRS members – 1993 survey. J Cataract Refract Surg 1994; 20: 459–67.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Hodgkins PR, Luff AJ, Morrell AJ, Teye Botchway L, Featherston TJ, Fielder AR. Current practice of cataract extraction and anaesthesia. Br J Ophthalmol 1992; 76: 323–26.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Norregaard JC, Schein OD, Anderson GF, Alonso J, Dunn E, Black C, et al. International variation in ophthalmological management of patients with cataracts. Arch Ophthalmol 1997; 115: 399–403.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Cataract Management Guideline Panel. Cataract in adults: Management of Functional Impairment. Clinical Practice Guideline, Number 4. Rockville, MD: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Agency for Health Care Policy and Research. AHCPR Pub. No. 93−0542. Feb. 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Neumann AC, McCarty GR, Sanders DR, Raanan MG. Small incisions to control astigmatism during cataract surgery. J Cataract Refract Surg 1989; 15: 78–84.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Pedersen O. Phacoemulsification and intraocular lens implantation in patients with cataract. Experiences of a beginning ‘phacoemulsification surgeon’. Acta Ophthalmol 1993; 68: 59–64.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Smith JH, Seiff SR. Outcomes of cataract surgery by residents at a public county hospital. Am J Ophthalmol 1997; 123: 448–54.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Cruz OA, Wallace GW, Gay CA, Matoba AY, Koch DD. Visual results and complications of phacoemulsification with intraocular lens implantation performed by ophthalmology residents. Ophthalmology 1992; 99: 448–52.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Menapace R, Skorpik Ch, Wedrich A. Evaluation of 150 consecutive cases of poly HEMA posterior chamber lenses implanted in the bag using a small−incision technique. J Cataract Refract Surg 1990; 16: 567–577.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Schein OD, Steinberg EP, Javiff JC, Cassard SD, Tielsh JM, Steinwachs, DM, et al. Variation in cataract surgery practice and clinical outcomes. Ophthalmology 1994; 101: 1142–52.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Heslin KB, Guerriero PM. Clinical retrospective study comparing planned extracapsular cataract extraction and phacoemulsification with and without lens implantation. Ann Ophthalmol 1984; 16: 956–62.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Sheets JH. A step beyond ECCE. CLAO J 1987; 13(1): 67–70.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Fetter RB, Brand D, Gam mache D. DRGs: their design and development. Michigan: Health Administration Press, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Cots F, Castells X, Garcia A, Saez M. Relación de los costes directos de hospitalización con la duración de la estancia. Gaceta Sanitaria 11997; 11(6): 287–95.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Udpa S. Activity−based costing for hospitals. Health Care Management Review 1996; 21(3): 83–96.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Alonso J, Black Ch, Norregaard JCh, Dunn E, Andersen TF, Espallargues M, et al. Cross−cultural differences in the reporting of global functional capacity: an example in cataract patients. Med Care 1998; 36(6): 868–78.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Castells, X., Comas, M., Castilla, M. et al. Clinical outcomes and costs of cataract surgery performed by planned ECCE and phacoemulsification. Int Ophthalmol 22, 363–367 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006484411524

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006484411524

Navigation