Posters

Post-market evaluation of surgeon feedback on TECNIS Toric II intraocular lens

Poster Details

First Author: D.Chang USA

Co Author(s):    J. Hu   S. Vilupuru   P. Janakiraman   L. Tsai           

Abstract Details

Purpose:

To present surgeon feedback responses from early TECNIS Toric II IOL implantations in US.

Setting:

Prospective, multicenter, single-arm, open-label study in the USA that meet indications for use of TECNIS Toric II IOL implanted in one or both eyes.

Methods:

For each implanted eye, a single-item questionnaire on surgical handleability (SHQ) and overall rotational stability is administered to the surgeon at the operative and 1-week visits, respectively. A 3-item surgeon satisfaction questionnaire (SSQ) assessing surgeon satisfaction with overall outcomes, rotational stability and uncorrected distance visual acuity will be administered at the 3-month visit. Data from 29 eyes (22 subjects) from 5 sites are presented here. Mean ± stdev and frequency of ratings and UCDVA will be presented for each implanted eye. This is an ongoing study and data from up to 250 eyes will be presented at the meeting.

Results:

The surgeons rated their confidence level in controlling the IOL position on a 5-point scale (5-extremly, 3- somewhat, 1- not at all). The mean confidence level was 4.62 ± 0.62. At the 1-week, mean surgeon satisfaction with rotational stability (5- very satisfied, 3- Undecided, 1- very dissatisfied) was 4.94 ± 0.24. Mean UCDVA was 20/22. 58%, 84%, 95% and 100% of eyes were 20/20, 20/25, 20/30, 20/40 or better, respectively.

Conclusions:

Early postoperative results in 29 eyes implanted with the TECNIS Toric II IOL demonstrate excellent uncorrected distance visual acuity, surgeon confidence with handleability and surgeon satisfaction with rotational stability of the IOL.

Financial Disclosure:

is employed by a for-profit company with an interest in the subject of the presentation, travel has been funded, fully or partially, by a company producing, developing or supplying the product or procedure presented, research is funded, fully or partially, by a company producing, developing or supplying the product or procedure presented, receives consulting fees, retainer, or contract payments from a company producing, developing or supplying the product or procedure presented