Quality of Life After Laser Vision Correction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Alireza Peyman, Matin Irajpour, Maryam Yazdi, Farzaneh Dehghanian, Pegah Noorshargh, Yasaman Broumand, Farnaz Fatemi, Mohsen Pourazizi
Author Information
  1. Alireza Peyman: Department of Ophthalmology, Isfahan Eye Research Center, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran. ORCID
  2. Matin Irajpour: Department of Ophthalmology, Isfahan Eye Research Center, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran. ORCID
  3. Maryam Yazdi: Child Growth and Development Research Center, Research Institute for Primordial Prevention of Non-Communicable Disease, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran. ORCID
  4. Farzaneh Dehghanian: Noor Research Center for Ophthalmic Epidemiology, Noor Eye Hospital, Tehran, Iran.
  5. Pegah Noorshargh: Department of Ophthalmology, Isfahan Eye Research Center, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran.
  6. Yasaman Broumand: Department of Ophthalmology, Isfahan Eye Research Center, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran.
  7. Farnaz Fatemi: Department of Ophthalmology, Isfahan Eye Research Center, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran.
  8. Mohsen Pourazizi: Department of Ophthalmology, Isfahan Eye Research Center, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran. ORCID

Abstract

To analyze patients' quality of life (QOL) after laser vision correction (LVC) from a worldwide literature review. Studies of prospective or cross-sectional design which evaluated QOL in patients after LVC and compared that to preoperative values or a matched group of emmetropes were included. The Web of Science, PubMed, Scopus, and ProQuest were searched for relevant articles published until February 2024. The fixed- or random-effects models were used to estimate the weighted mean difference (WMD) for postoperative QOL changes. Meta-regression was conducted for adjusting the effects of potential confounders. A total of 11 peer-reviewed articles (1753 patients) were included in the study. LVC improved QOL of patients at one (SMD���=���0.38, 95% CI: 0.15, 0.60), three (SMD���=���1.03, 95% CI: 0.55, 1.50), and six months after surgery (SMD���=���0.71, 95% CI: 0.30, 1.11). In meta-regression analysis, QOL improvement was lower in older patients compared to younger ones (���=���-0.06, 95% CI: -0.11, -0.01). Also, no statistically significant difference was noted while comparing QOL in post-laser refractive surgery patients and emmetropes (SMD���=���-0.44, 95% CI: -0.95, 0.07). Patients undergoing LVC experience significant improvements in QOL, particularly in younger subjects, and achieve comparable QOL to individuals with emmetropia.

Keywords

References

  1. Eye Contact Lens. 2019 Jan;45(1):34-39 [PMID: 30048340]
  2. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2019 Jun;45(6):752-759 [PMID: 30846350]
  3. JAMA Ophthalmol. 2022 Dec 1;140(12):1181-1192 [PMID: 36301551]
  4. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2001 May;27(5):665-73 [PMID: 11377893]
  5. Cornea. 2007 Apr;26(3):246-54 [PMID: 17413947]
  6. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2005 Dec;31(12):2313-8 [PMID: 16473223]
  7. J Curr Ophthalmol. 2022 Jan 06;33(4):431-436 [PMID: 35128190]
  8. PLoS One. 2021 Dec 23;16(12):e0261347 [PMID: 34941889]
  9. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2000 Apr;26(4):497-509 [PMID: 10771222]
  10. Br J Ophthalmol. 2006 Jan;90(1):20-3 [PMID: 16361660]
  11. JBI Evid Synth. 2024 Mar 01;22(3):378-388 [PMID: 38287725]
  12. J Refract Surg. 2015 Sep;31(9):594-8 [PMID: 26352564]
  13. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2005 Aug;31(8):1537-43 [PMID: 16129288]
  14. BMJ. 2003 Sep 6;327(7414):557-60 [PMID: 12958120]
  15. Asia Pac J Ophthalmol (Phila). 2016 Nov/Dec;5(6):434-437 [PMID: 27898448]
  16. Eye Contact Lens. 2012 Mar;38(2):116-21 [PMID: 22293405]
  17. Eur J Ophthalmol. 2023 Jan;33(1):595-601 [PMID: 35656757]
  18. Asia Pac J Ophthalmol (Phila). 2020 Dec;9(6):498-504 [PMID: 33284229]
  19. Eye Contact Lens. 2009 May;35(3):128-32 [PMID: 19421019]
  20. Indian J Ophthalmol. 2023 Apr;71(4):1105-1114 [PMID: 37026241]
  21. Clin Ophthalmol. 2016 Sep 26;10:1859-1864 [PMID: 27713617]
  22. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2003 Jul;44(7):2892-9 [PMID: 12824228]
  23. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2024 Jul 1;50(7):767-776 [PMID: 38353281]
  24. J Cataract Refract Surg. 1998 Mar;24(3):285-7 [PMID: 9559453]
  25. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2018 Mar;44(3):274-279 [PMID: 29610024]
  26. Ophthalmology. 2005 Feb;112(2):184-90 [PMID: 15691549]
  27. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2003 Jun;29(6):1152-8 [PMID: 12842683]
  28. Eye Vis (Lond). 2014 Oct 16;1:3 [PMID: 26605350]
  29. Lasers Med Sci. 2021 Feb;36(1):75-81 [PMID: 32297251]
  30. Acta Biomed. 2023 Oct 17;94(5):e2023216 [PMID: 37850767]
  31. Arch Ophthalmol. 1994 Mar;112(3):329-35 [PMID: 8129657]
  32. BMJ. 2002 Jun 15;324(7351):1417 [PMID: 12065262]
  33. Ophthalmology. 2003 Dec;110(12):2302-9 [PMID: 14644711]
  34. Math Biosci Eng. 2023 Jan 31;20(4):6110-6133 [PMID: 37161100]
  35. JAMA Ophthalmol. 2017 Jan 01;135(1):3-12 [PMID: 27893063]
  36. Clin Ophthalmol. 2019 Mar 26;13:561-570 [PMID: 30988598]
  37. J Ophthalmic Vis Res. 2012 Jul;7(3):219-24 [PMID: 23264864]
  38. Ophthalmology. 2009 Apr;116(4):691-701 [PMID: 19344821]
  39. Int Ophthalmol. 2022 Jul;42(7):2273-2288 [PMID: 35041131]

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0QOLpatients95%CI:0LVClaser11-0qualitylifevisioncorrectioncomparedemmetropesincludedarticlesdifferenceSMD���=���01surgeryyoungersignificantrefractiveanalyzepatients'worldwideliteraturereviewStudiesprospectivecross-sectionaldesignevaluatedpreoperativevaluesmatchedgroupWebSciencePubMedScopusProQuestsearchedrelevantpublishedFebruary2024fixed-random-effectsmodelsusedestimateweightedmeanWMDpostoperativechangesMeta-regressionconductedadjustingeffectspotentialconfounderstotalpeer-reviewed1753studyimprovedone381560threeSMD���=���1035550sixmonths7130meta-regressionanalysisimprovementlowerolderones���=���-00601Alsostatisticallynotedcomparingpost-laserSMD���=���-0449507PatientsundergoingexperienceimprovementsparticularlysubjectsachievecomparableindividualsemmetropiaQualityLifeLaserVisionCorrection:SystematicReviewMeta-AnalysisSitukeratomileusisphotorefractivekeratectomysurgicalprocedures

Similar Articles

Cited By