[2015-2018年开放与微创泪管再通术后患者主观生活质量改善比较]。

4区 医学 Q3 Medicine Ophthalmologe Pub Date : 2022-01-01 DOI:10.1007/s00347-021-01400-w
J Mehlan, F Ismani, S Dulz, S Green, M S Spitzer, F Schüttauf
{"title":"[2015-2018年开放与微创泪管再通术后患者主观生活质量改善比较]。","authors":"J Mehlan,&nbsp;F Ismani,&nbsp;S Dulz,&nbsp;S Green,&nbsp;M S Spitzer,&nbsp;F Schüttauf","doi":"10.1007/s00347-021-01400-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Open and minimally invasive tear duct surgery are among the common surgical indications; however, little is known so far about the respective influences on the quality of life.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The aim of this study was to compare the subjective influence on the quality of life of patients after open and minimally invasive surgical techniques for recanalization of dacryostenosis.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>From the collective of patients who were surgically treated at the University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf from 2015 to 2018, a total of 169 patients (111 dacryocystorhinostomy, DCR, 58 endoscopy) took part in the survey and answered 9 questions about subjective satisfaction, which were evaluated also comparatively.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>When asked about postoperative satisfaction, the patients were significantly more satisfied after DCR (p = 0.001) than the patients who underwent a lacrimal endoscopy. There was no significant difference in terms of postoperative complications (p = 0.348). The rate of reoperations, however, was significantly higher in the patient group who underwent lacrimal endoscopy (χ<sup>2</sup>-test, p = 0.004).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In summary it can be said that DCR is not inferior to lacrimal endoscopy in terms of patient satisfaction.</p>","PeriodicalId":54676,"journal":{"name":"Ophthalmologe","volume":"119 Suppl 1","pages":"41-47"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1007/s00347-021-01400-w","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"[Comparison of subjective improvement in quality of life of patients after open and minimally invasive surgical techniques for recanalization of lacrimal duct stenosis in 2015-2018].\",\"authors\":\"J Mehlan,&nbsp;F Ismani,&nbsp;S Dulz,&nbsp;S Green,&nbsp;M S Spitzer,&nbsp;F Schüttauf\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00347-021-01400-w\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Open and minimally invasive tear duct surgery are among the common surgical indications; however, little is known so far about the respective influences on the quality of life.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The aim of this study was to compare the subjective influence on the quality of life of patients after open and minimally invasive surgical techniques for recanalization of dacryostenosis.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>From the collective of patients who were surgically treated at the University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf from 2015 to 2018, a total of 169 patients (111 dacryocystorhinostomy, DCR, 58 endoscopy) took part in the survey and answered 9 questions about subjective satisfaction, which were evaluated also comparatively.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>When asked about postoperative satisfaction, the patients were significantly more satisfied after DCR (p = 0.001) than the patients who underwent a lacrimal endoscopy. There was no significant difference in terms of postoperative complications (p = 0.348). The rate of reoperations, however, was significantly higher in the patient group who underwent lacrimal endoscopy (χ<sup>2</sup>-test, p = 0.004).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In summary it can be said that DCR is not inferior to lacrimal endoscopy in terms of patient satisfaction.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54676,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ophthalmologe\",\"volume\":\"119 Suppl 1\",\"pages\":\"41-47\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1007/s00347-021-01400-w\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ophthalmologe\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00347-021-01400-w\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ophthalmologe","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00347-021-01400-w","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:开放和微创泪管手术是常见的手术指征;然而,到目前为止,人们对它们各自对生活质量的影响知之甚少。目的:本研究的目的是比较开放和微创泪管狭窄再通手术技术对患者生活质量的主观影响。材料与方法:选取2015 - 2018年在汉堡-埃彭多夫大学医学中心接受手术治疗的患者集体,共169例患者(泪囊鼻腔造口术111例、DCR、内窥镜58例)参与调查,回答主观满意度9个问题,并进行比较评价。结果:DCR术后满意度显著高于泪道内窥镜组(p = 0.001)。两组术后并发症发生率比较,差异无统计学意义(p = 0.348)。泪道内窥镜组的再手术率明显高于泪道内窥镜组(χ2-test, p = 0.004)。结论:综上所述,DCR在患者满意度方面不逊于泪道内窥镜检查。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
[Comparison of subjective improvement in quality of life of patients after open and minimally invasive surgical techniques for recanalization of lacrimal duct stenosis in 2015-2018].

Background: Open and minimally invasive tear duct surgery are among the common surgical indications; however, little is known so far about the respective influences on the quality of life.

Objective: The aim of this study was to compare the subjective influence on the quality of life of patients after open and minimally invasive surgical techniques for recanalization of dacryostenosis.

Material and methods: From the collective of patients who were surgically treated at the University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf from 2015 to 2018, a total of 169 patients (111 dacryocystorhinostomy, DCR, 58 endoscopy) took part in the survey and answered 9 questions about subjective satisfaction, which were evaluated also comparatively.

Results: When asked about postoperative satisfaction, the patients were significantly more satisfied after DCR (p = 0.001) than the patients who underwent a lacrimal endoscopy. There was no significant difference in terms of postoperative complications (p = 0.348). The rate of reoperations, however, was significantly higher in the patient group who underwent lacrimal endoscopy (χ2-test, p = 0.004).

Conclusion: In summary it can be said that DCR is not inferior to lacrimal endoscopy in terms of patient satisfaction.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Ophthalmologe
Ophthalmologe 医学-眼科学
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
95
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Der Ophthalmologe is an internationally recognized journal dealing with all aspects of ophthalmology. The journal serves both the scientific exchange and the continuing education of ophthalmologists. Freely submitted original papers allow the presentation of important clinical studies and serve scientific exchange. Case reports feature interesting cases and aim at optimizing diagnostic and therapeutic strategies. Comprehensive reviews on a specific topical issue focus on providing evidenced based information on diagnostics and therapy. Review articles under the rubric ''Continuing Medical Education'' present verified results of scientific research and their integration into daily practice.
期刊最新文献
Myelin Oligodendrocyte Glycoprotein Antibody-Mediated Optic Neuritis Following COVID-19 Vaccination. [Acute unilateral impaired vision after COVID vaccination]. [Epidemiology and treatment of retinopathy of prematurity. The Hannover data in the Retina.net ROP registry from 2001-2017]. [Displacement of a STARflo glaucoma drainage implant with accompanying complications]. [Complete visual recovery after Nd:YAG laser polishing of the anterior surface of the intraocular lens].
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1