Clinical evaluation of three incision size-dependent phacoemulsification systems.

PURPOSE:

To compare the outcomes of cataract surgery performed with 3 incision size-dependent phacoemulsification groups (1.8, 2.2, and 3.0 mm).

DESIGN:

Prospective randomized comparative study.

METHODS:

One hundred twenty eyes of 120 patients with age-related cataract (grades 2 to 4) were categorized according to the Lens Opacities Classification System III. Eligible subjects were randomly assigned to 3 surgical groups using coaxial phacoemulsification through 3 clear corneal incision sizes (1.8, 2.2, and 3.0 mm). Different intraoperative and postoperative outcome measures were obtained, with corneal incision size and surgically induced astigmatism as the main clinical outcomes.

RESULTS:

There were no statistically significant differences in most of the intraoperative and postoperative outcome measures among the 3 groups. However, the mean cord length of the clear corneal incision was increased in each group after surgery. The mean maximal clear corneal incision thickness in the 1.8-mm group was significantly greater than for the other groups at 1 month. The mean surgically induced astigmatism in the 1.8- and 2.2-mm groups was significantly less than that in the 3.0-mm group after 1 month, without significant difference between the 1.8- and 2.2-mm groups.

CONCLUSIONS:

With appropriate equipment, smaller incisions may result in less astigmatism, but the particular system used will influence incision stress and wound integrity, and may thus limit the reduction in incision size and astigmatism that is achievable.

Evaluation of Restorative Dentistry Specialty Registrars’ Clinical Experience of Developmental Disorders: A Survey

Background

Specialty Registrars in Restorative Dentistry (StRs) should be competent in the independent restorative management of patients with developmental disorders including hypodontia and cleft lip/palate upon completion of their specialist training.1 Knowledge and management may be assessed via the Intercollegiate Specialty Fellowship Examination (ISFE) in Restorative Dentistry.2

Objective

The aim of this study was to collate and compare data on the training and experience of StRs in the management of patients with developmental disorders across different training units within the British Isles.

Methods

Questionnaires were distributed to all StRs attending the Annual General Meeting of the Specialty Registrars in Restorative Dentistry Group, Belfast, in October 2015. Participants were asked to rate their confidence and experience of assessing and planning treatment for patients with developmental disorders, construction of appropriate prostheses, and provision of dental implants. Respondents were also asked to record clinical supervision and didactic teaching at their unit, and to rate their confidence of passing a future ISFE station assessing knowledge of developmental disorders.

Results

Responses were obtained from 32 StRs (n=32) training within all five countries of the British Isles. The majority of respondents were based in England (72%) with three in Wales, and two in each of Scotland, Northern Ireland, and the Republic of Ireland. Approximately one third of respondents (34%) were in the final years of training (years 4-6). Almost half of the StRs reported that they were not confident of independently assessing (44%) new patients with a developmental disorder, with larger numbers (72%) indicating a lack of confidence in treatment planning. Six respondents rated their experience of treating obturator patients as ‘poor’ or ‘very poor’. The majority (56%) rated their experience of implant provision in these cases as ‘good’ or ‘excellent’ with three-quarters (75%) rating clinical supervision at their unit as ‘good’ or ‘excellent’. Less than half (41%) rated the didactic teaching at their unit as ‘good’ or ‘excellent’, and only 8 StRs indicated that they were confident of passing an ISFE station focused on developmental disorders.

Conclusion

Experience and training regarding patients with developmental disorders is inconsistent for StRs across the British Isles with a number of trainees reporting a lack of clinical exposure.

A tool for the evaluation of slaughter horse welfare during unloading

This study aimed to develop a scientific and practical tool to be used to assess horse welfare after commercial transport over long journeys. A set of physical, behavioural and environmental measures was selected, covering welfare aspects of both transport and unloading procedures. The protocol was field-tested on 51 intra-EU commercial transports arriving at different sites in Italy. Univariate analysis was implemented to look for associations between the input variables (environmental hazards potentially affecting the animal well-being during long transports) and the outcome variables (direct evaluation of the animal condition). No severe welfare impairments were recorded (ie dead on arrival, severe injuries, non-ambulatory animals), while milder ones were more frequent at unloading (eg slipping; 36.7%, reluctance to move; 9.6%). Correlations emerged between ramp slope and falling; type of ramp floor and slipping; fast gait and the presence of gaps between the ramp and the floor. The horses' behaviour was also related to the type of handling procedure used. The measures were repeatable and practical to apply and score during real-time unloading. This work provides a sound basis for a new and practical welfare assessment tool for horses travelling over long journeys. Careful and constant application of this protocol would provide stakeholders with the opportunity to track and monitor changes in the industry over time, as well as to identify high risk areas in transport routines.