Table 2

Overview of individual study attributes

StudySkills trainedStudy typeParticipantsMeasured outcomesSummary of effect
Jacobsen et al15Navigation
Bimanual training
Single group19 surgeonsCorrelation between OSACSS scores and EyeSi scores
OSACSS scores correlated to EyeSi scores (p=0.003)
Ferris et al21N/ARetrospective cohort study265 surgeonsPCR rates pre and post EyeSi
(Surgical outcomes)
38% reduction in PCR rates following EyeSi implementation (p=0.003)
Bozkurt et al19Navigation training,
Forceps training,
Bimanual training
Antitremor training
Non-randomised group comparison7 PGY1
6 PGY2
3 surgeons
  1. Mean scores in the capsulorhexis module

  2. Non-dominant hand

  3. Mature cataract

  4. Performance improvement

  1. PGY1 <PGY2<surgeons

  2. PGY1 <PGY2<surgeons

  3. PGY1 <PGY2<surgeons

  4. Surgeons<PGY2<PGY1

Staropoli et al14Navigation, Bimanual training
Antitremor training
Capsulorhexis, Phacoemulsification
Non-randomised group comparison11 PGY3 residents trained prior to EyeSi implementation
11 PGY3 residents trained after the instalment of the EyeSi
Posterior capsule rupture
Vitreous prolapse
Retained lens fragment
Zonular dehiscence
IOL dislocation
Return to OR
(Surgical outcomes)
Complication rate in the simulator trained was 2.1% vs 5.1% in the simulator-naïve (p=0.037)
Lucas et al22Capsulorhexis, PhacoemulsificationNon-randomised group comparison7 PGY2 pre EyeSi
7 PGY2 post EyeSi
Posterior capsule rupture rate
Aphakia rate
Nucleus fragment dislocation rate
Extracapsular conversion rate
(Surgical outcomes)
Complication rate among the EyeSi trained residents was lower (p=0.031)
Rohipoor et al20Navigation training,
Forceps training,
Bimanual training
Antitremor training
Retrospective cohort study30 residentsRelationship between EyeSi scores in early residency and surgical performance measures in the final year of residency
Correlation between forceps training and navigation training scores on the simulator with total GRASIS scores
Thomsen et al17Navigation training,
Forceps training,
Bimanual training
Antitremor training
Phacoemulsification (divide and conquer)
Single group11 surgeonsEyeSi simulator scores
Motion tracking scores
The two scores were strongest correlated (p=0.017)
Thomsen et al16Navigation training
Forceps training
Bimanual training,
Antitremor training
Capsulorhexis Phacoemulsification (divide and conquer)
Single group, pre-post test18 surgeonsChange in OSACSS scores after training intervention
(Surgical outcomes)
  1. Novice and Intermediate surgeons showed significant improvement after training (p=0.008, p=0.018)

  2. Experienced cataract surgeons did not benefit

Pokroy et al23N/ANon-randomised group comparison20 residents1 Incidence of posterior capsule tear with or without vitreous loss, and2 Operating time
(Surgical outcomes)
  1. Complication rate was not significantly different

  2. Residents trained on the EyeSi had quicker surgical times

McCannel et al18CapsulorhexisSingle group, pre-post test38 residentsThe rate of errant CCC
(Surgical outcomes)
There was a 68% reduction in the rate of errant CCCs in the postintervention cohort (p=0.0001)
  • CCC, continuous curvilinear capsulorhexis; GRASIS, Global Rating Assessment of Skills in Intraocular Surgery; N/A, not available; OSACSS, Objective Structured Assessment of Cataract Surgical Skill; PCR, posterior capsular rupture.