Ophthalmologists' attitudes toward immediate sequential bilateral cataract surgery: Dutch national survey

Lindsay S. Spekreijse, Claudette A. Veldhuizen, Ype P. Henry, Frank J. H. M. van den Biggelaar, Carmen D. Dirksen, Rudy M. M. A. Nuijts

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

3 Citations (Scopus)


PURPOSE: To evaluate current practice patterns of immediate sequential bilateral cataract surgery (ISBCS) in the Netherlands and assess ophthalmologists' attitudes toward performing ISBCS in future cataract care. SETTING: Dutch ophthalmic society members. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study (national survey). METHODS: An electronic survey on ISBCS was sent as part of an annual survey on cataract practice patterns to members of the Dutch ophthalmic society. Questions regarding current ISBCS practice patterns, willingness to perform ISBCS routinely in future care, reasons for performing ISBCS, and reasons for not performing ISBCS were included. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: 237 (45.6%) of 520 survey recipients responded to the overall survey. Data on the ISBCS questions were available from 227 respondents. 62 ophthalmologists (27.3%) currently performed ISBCS, predominantly in low patient volumes (90.3% on 1 to 5 patients per month). However, 108 (47.6%) of 227 ophthalmologists considered performing ISBCS routinely in future practice. Procedures for which ISBCS was mainly considered included age-related cataract surgery using topical and general anesthesia. Availability of separate products and instruments for both eyes and patient advantages were considered of high importance when performing ISBCS. Main reasons for not performing ISBCS included the risk for endophthalmitis and potential medicolegal aspects. CONCLUSIONS: Although ISBCS is currently not a routine procedure in the Netherlands, it is considered by almost 50% of surgeons. To improve implementation on a national level, potential barriers identified in this survey (fear of bilateral endophthalmitis, potential medicolegal issues, and a lack of availability of separate products for both eyes) should be addressed.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1044-1049
Number of pages6
JournalJournal of cataract and refractive surgery
Issue number9
Publication statusPublished - 1 Sept 2022

Cite this