Tunc 1999.
Methods | Study design: Parallel group RCT | |
Participants |
Country: Turkey Setting: Eye hospital Intervention: NSAIDs plus steroids
Comparator: Steroids alone
Inclusion criteria: Patients with unilateral cataracts. Exclusion criteria: Diabetes; rheumatoid disease; immunological disease; uveitis; glaucoma; ARMD; retinitis pigmentosa; retinal detachment; NSAIDs use; corticosteroid use; diuretic use; antihistaminics; previous eye surgery; surgical complications (e.g.. posterior capsular tear, vitreous loss, iatrogenic iridodialysis); combined surgery; postoperative complications (e.g.. iris capture, retinal detachment, choroidal detachment); non‐compliance with medications; use of systemic steroids or NSAIDs during the follow‐up period; definite posterior capsule opacification. Pretreatment: No differences in age sex, and hypertension. Eyes: One eye, people with unilateral cataracts recruited. |
|
Interventions |
Intervention: NSAIDs plus steroids
Comparator: Steroids alone
At the end of surgery all participants had subconjunctival injection of dexamethasone and gentamicin. All participants used 0.03% tobramycin eye drops postoperatively 4 times a day for 14 days. Type of surgery: ECCE |
|
Outcomes |
Follow‐up: 2 months
|
|
Contact details |
Authors name: Murat Tunc Institution: Dokuz Eylul University Medical School Email: NR Address: Dokuz Eylul University Cumhuriyet Blv No:144, 35210 Alsancak/İzmir, Turkey |
|
Notes |
Funding sources: NR Declaration of interest: NR Date study conducted: NR Trial registration number: NR Contacting study investigators: Trial authors not contacted. |
|
Risk of bias | ||
Bias | Authors' judgement | Support for judgement |
Random sequence generation (selection bias) | Unclear risk | Judgement comment: Not reported how list was generated. Trial was described as “randomised” but with no further details. |
Allocation concealment (selection bias) | Unclear risk | Judgement comment: Not reported how allocation administered. Trial was described as “randomised” but with no further details. |
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes | High risk | No information on masking. We assume that in absence of reporting on this participants and personnel were not masked. |
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes | Unclear risk | Quote: "The angiograms were read by the retina unit (Dr Saatchi); the patients' names and treatment protocols were kept hidden. Judgement quote: No other information on other outcomes. |
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes | Unclear risk | Judgement Comment: Follow‐up not reported. |
Selective reporting (reporting bias) | Unclear risk | Judgement Comment: No access to protocol or trial registry entry. |