Quality of life changes after myopic wavefront-guided laser in situ keratomileusis

Shady T. Awwad, Nancy Alvarez-Chedzoy, Robert W Bowman, Harrison D Cavanagh, James P McCulley

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

10 Scopus citations


OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the changes in quality of life in patients undergoing wavefront-guided laser in situ keratomeilusis (WG-LASIK). METHODS: Thirty candidates undergoing WG-LASIK were enrolled in a prospective study at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas, TX. The patients were asked to fill out a questionnaire which had questions pertaining to their quality of life, preoperatively and 3 months postoperatively. The average patients' age was 41.4 ± 12.45 years, and the preoperative manifest refractive spherical equivalent was -3.62 ± 1.60 D (-1.00 to -7.50 D). RESULTS: The total quality-of-life score improved from 3.70 ± 0.91 to 3.90 ± 0.97 (P = 0.01). Most of the psychologic well-being items like energy level, stress level, self-confidence, sense of safety, and the social role subscale items such as ability to communicate with others, job performance, and sex life showed significant improvement in mean scores (P < 0.05). The postoperative visual function and visual symptom scores, however, were overall similar to preoperative levels. CONCLUSIONS: Consistent with previous studies with conventional LASIK, there is a significant improvement in quality of life after WG-LASIK. The main changes pertain to psychologic well-being and social role, more than the changes in visual function per se. However, the latter did not show evidence of deterioration, nor of worsening of visual symptoms, contrary to some studies with conventional LASIK.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)128-132
Number of pages5
JournalEye and Contact Lens
Issue number3
StatePublished - May 2009

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Ophthalmology


Dive into the research topics of 'Quality of life changes after myopic wavefront-guided laser in situ keratomileusis'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this