EyeWorld India December 2019 Issue

EWAP DECEMBER 2019 31 SECONDARY FEATURE regulatory processes established by governments and insurance companies. Dr. Lawless and his colleagues have made an “attempt to begin the conversation of what is cataract” to “take back the decision process.” º7i `iVˆ`i` ̅>Ì Üi need a system that is beyond question, cannot be criticized by insurance, bureaucracies and patients,” he said. To this end, Dr. Lawless and his colleagues formulated a Cataract >ÌÀˆÝ] > ÃÞÃÌi“ LÞ Ü…ˆV…Û>ÀˆœÕà criteria are assessed to provide a score to determine the indication for surgery. /…iˆÀ >ÌÀˆÝ ˆ˜VÕ`i` vœÕÀ VÀˆÌiÀˆ>\ -ÕLiV̈Ûi] i“«œÞˆ˜} the Cat PROM5 questionnaire vœÀ «>̈i˜Ìà ̜ w œÕÌÆ ÃÕLiV̈Ûi clinical, employing the Lens "«>VˆÌÞ >ÃÈwV>̈œ˜ -ÞÃÌi“ (LOCS) III; objective clinical, establishing a scoring system for various devices including Pentacam and iTrace devices; and co-morbidities. The system provides a score from 0 to 8, by which surgeons can make a decision of whether to perform cataract surgery that is backed by evidence. This, he said, is their “attempt to begin the conversation on this process. This needs to be w˜iÃÃi`] LÕÌ Ì…ˆÃ ˆÃ œÕÀ wÀÃÌ attempt.” /…i >Ì>À>VÌ >ÌÀˆÝ ̅Õà attempts to use patient subjective, surgeon subjective, and instrument objective measures to determine the È}˜ˆwV>˜Vi œv i˜Ã `ÞÃv՘V̈œ˜° It is meant to be a guide for patients and surgeons, that will hopefully keep health insurers and government health departments from making poor decisions regarding reimbursement and access to care, while also protecting surgeons by allowing them to make decisions that are, by having a clearly described and outlined basis, “beyond criticism.” References 1. Meyer JJ, Kim MJ, Kim T. Effects œv œ˜Ì>VÌ i˜Ã 7i>À œ˜ ˆœ“iÌÀÞ Measurements for IOL Calculations. Eye %QPVCEV .GPU 2017 Sep 21;44 Suppl £\-Óxxq-Óxn°