Role of the bandage soft contact lens in the postoperative laser in situ keratomileusis patient
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To determine whether a bandage soft contact lens (BSCL) is routinely needed in the postoperative laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) patient and whether topical tetracaine 0.5% or diclofenac sodium 0.1% (Voltaren) is more effective in relieving patient discomfort than a BSCL. SETTING: LCA-Vision Center, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. METHODS: In this prospective randomized comparative study, all patients had bilateral simultaneous LASIK procedures. Post-LASIK patient comfort was evaluated through 3 arms of the study: BSCL versus no BSCL, 40 consecutive patients with 1 eye randomized to receive a BSCL and no BSCL in the fellow eye; BSCL versus tetracaine 0.5%, 26 consecutive patients with 1 eye randomized to receive a BSCL and tetracaine 0.5% in the fellow eye; tetracaine 0.5% versus Voltaren, 54 consecutive patients with 1 eye randomized to receive tetracaine 0.5% and Voltaren in the fellow eye. RESULTS: The patient preferences after LASIK were as follows: BSCL versus no BSCL-12 (30%) versus 23 (58%) (P =.062); BSCL versus tetracaine 0.5%-4 (15%) versus 22 (85%) (P <.001). On average, the eyes with no BSCL had a 2-line improvement in uncorrected visual acuity over the BSCL eyes. Tetracaine 0.5% versus Voltaren-13 (24%) versus 21 (39%) (P =.170). CONCLUSIONS: The routine use of a BSCL in the postoperative LASIK patient is not necessary. Voltaren and tetracaine 0.5% were safe and more effective in relieving postoperative patient discomfort and resulted in improved visual acuity immediately postoperatively.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".