June 2021
Volume 62, Issue 8
Open Access
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   June 2021
Patient preference regarding laser photocoagulation or cryoretinopexy for the treatment of retinal pathology
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Saaquib Bakhsh
    Beaumont Health, Royal Oak, Michigan, United States
  • Ryan A Shields
    Beaumont Health, Royal Oak, Michigan, United States
  • Mohammad Ali Tahboub
    Beaumont Health, Royal Oak, Michigan, United States
  • Antonio Capone
    Beaumont Health, Royal Oak, Michigan, United States
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships   Saaquib Bakhsh, None; Ryan Shields, None; Mohammad Tahboub, None; Antonio Capone, None
  • Footnotes
    Support  None
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science June 2021, Vol.62, 3097. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Saaquib Bakhsh, Ryan A Shields, Mohammad Ali Tahboub, Antonio Capone; Patient preference regarding laser photocoagulation or cryoretinopexy for the treatment of retinal pathology. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2021;62(8):3097.

      Download citation file:


      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Purpose : To date there has not been a study investigating patient preferences between laser photocoagulation or cryoretinopexy for the treatment of peripheral retinal pathology. We performed a retrospective single-center clinical survey study to assess patient preferences and investigate any underlying associations.

Methods : We performed a single-center, retrospective, twelve-question, patient-preference phone survey study of 100 qualifying patients (Figure 1). Details of the patients’ age, gender, pathology location, laterality, laser type, laser spot size, power, number of spots, anesthesia type, number of cryopexy applications, same eye or fellow eye treatment, and time between treatments were also recorded. The primary outcome measure was the patient’s preferred treatment with either laser, cryopexy, or no preference.

Results : Patients reported having experienced greater anxiety during the laser procedure (40%) (Figure 2A). 46% of patients reported experiencing more pain after treatment with cryopexy. Some patients had no pain during or after either procedure (Figure 2B). The incidence of adverse reactions after the procedure was higher for cryopexy. Slightly more patients (40%) perceived the laser to take longer than cryopexy (31%). The majority felt that it was easier to recover from laser (53%).

Patients who had undergone subconjunctival lidocaine for laser were more likely to prefer cryopexy (p = 0.012). There was a negative association between a patient’s likelihood of preferring cryopexy and the number of applications (p = 0.009). Overall, 60% preferred laser, 25% preferred cryopexy, and 15% expressed no preference.

Conclusions : In conclusion, among patients who received both laser and cryopexy for the treatment of peripheral retinal pathology, the perception was that laser took longer than cryopexy but was easier to recover from. Overall, most patients (60%) preferred laser to cryopexy (25%). Subconjunctival anesthesia was less preferred to topical anesthesia for laser procedures. If cryopexy is to be performed, minimizing the number of freezes may improve the patient experience and recovery.

This is a 2021 ARVO Annual Meeting abstract.

 

 

×
×

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.

×