Yes / Purpose: Most patients report being highly satisfied with the outcome of cataract surgery but there are variable reports regarding the impact of cataract surgery on some real-world activities, such as fall rates. We hypothesised that adaptations to changed refractive correction and visual function may cause difficulties in undertaking everyday activities for some patients and used a series of focus groups to explore this issue. Method: Qualitative methods were used to explore patients’ experiences of their vision following cataract surgery, including adaptation to vision changes and their post-surgical spectacle prescription. Twenty-six participants took part in five focus groups (Mean age = 68.2 ± 11.4 years), and the data were analysed using thematic analysis. Results: We identified three themes. ‘Changes to Vision’ explores participants’ adaptation following cataract surgery. While several had problems with tasks relying on binocular vision, few found them bothersome and they resolved following second eye surgery. Participants described a trial and error approach to solving these problems rather than applying solutions suggested by their eyecare professionals. ‘Prescription Restrictions’ describes the long-term vision problems that pre-surgery myopic patients experienced as a consequence of becoming emmetropic following surgery and thus needing spectacles for reading and other close work activities, which they did not need before surgery. Very few reported that they had the information or time to make a decision regarding their post-operative correction. ‘Information Needs’ describes participant’s responses to the post-surgical information they were given, and the unmet information need regarding when they can drive following surgery. Conclusion: The findings highlight the need for clinicians to provide information on adaptation effects, assist patients to select the refractive outcome that best suits their lifestyle, and provide clear advice about when patients can start driving again. Patients need to be provided with better guidance from clinicians and prescribing guidelines for clinicians would be beneficial, particularly for the period between first- and second-eye surgery. / Dunhill Medical Trust. Grant Number: RTF1806/53.

Although experiential prescribing maxims are quoted in some optometric textbooks their content varies significantly and no direct research evidence was available to support their use. Accordingly in chapters 2 and 3, the uses of several potential prescribing rules were investigated in the UK optometric profession. Our results indicated that the subjective refraction result exerted a strong hold on the prescribing outcome with 40-85% of optometrists prescribing the subjective result in a variety of scenarios. The finding that after 40 years qualified, experienced optometrists were three times more likely to suggest a partial prescription was an important discovery that provides significant support for the prescribing rules suggested by various authors. It would also appear from the results of the retrospective evaluation of the 'if it ain't broke, don't fix it' clinical maxim in Chapter 4 that spectacle dissatisfaction rates could be reduced by between 22 to 42% depending on how strictly the maxim is interpreted by the practitioner. Certainly an 'if it ain't broke, don't fix it much' maxim was suggested as being particularly appropriate. Chapter 5 included a reanalysis of previously published data that found no change in falls rate after cataract surgery to investigate any influence of refractive correction change and /or visual acuity change on falls rate. Unfortunately these data were not sufficiently powered to provide significant results. In chapter 6, a spectacle adaptation questionnaire (SAQ) was developed and validated using Rasch analysis. Initial studies found no differences in SAQ with gender or age.

Although experiential prescribing maxims are quoted in some optometric textbooks their content varies significantly and no direct research evidence was available to support their use. Accordingly in chapters 2 and 3, the uses of several potential prescribing rules were investigated in the UK optometric profession. Our results indicated that the subjective refraction result exerted a strong hold on the prescribing outcome with 40-85% of optometrists prescribing the subjective result in a variety of scenarios. The finding that after 40 years qualified, experienced optometrists were three times more likely to suggest a partial prescription was an important discovery that provides significant support for the prescribing rules suggested by various authors. It would also appear from the results of the retrospective evaluation of the ¿if it ain¿t broke, don¿t fix it¿ clinical maxim in Chapter 4 that spectacle dissatisfaction rates could be reduced by between 22 to 42% depending on how strictly the maxim is interpreted by the practitioner. Certainly an ¿if it ain¿t broke, don¿t fix it much¿ maxim was suggested as being particularly appropriate. Chapter 5 included a reanalysis of previously published data that found no change in falls rate after cataract surgery to investigate any influence of refractive correction change and /or visual acuity change on falls rate. Unfortunately these data were not sufficiently powered to provide significant results. In chapter 6, a spectacle adaptation questionnaire (SAQ) was developed and validated using Rasch analysis. Initial studies found no differences in SAQ with gender or age. / College of Optometrists