Table 2

Functional and best corrected vision by patient group—pseudophakic compared with aphakic

	WHO category	Pseudophakic (n=84)	Aphakic (n=82)	All 166	Risk of poor outcome for aphakics VA <6/60 Odds ratio (95% CI)
Functional presenting vision
⩾6/18	0	15 (17.9%)	8 (9.8%)	23 (13.9%)
<6/18–6/60	1	32 (38.1%)	14 (17.1%)	46 (27.7%)
<6/60–3/60	2	27 (32.1%)	12 (14.0%)	39 (23.5%)
<3/60	3	10 (11.9%)	44 (53.7%)	54 (32.5%)	3.46 (1.72–7.02)
PL	4	0	3 (3.7%)	3 (1.8%)
NPL	5	0	1 (1.2%)	1 (0.6%)
Best corrected vision
⩾6/18	0	50 (59.5%)	28 (34.1%)	78 (47.0%)
<6/18–6/60	1	25 (29.8%)	31 (37.8%)	56 (33.7%)
<6/60–3/60	2	1 (1.2%)	17 (20.7%)	18 (10.8%)
<3/60	3	8 (9.5%)	3 (3.7%)	11 (6.6%)	3.25 (1.31–8.24)
PL	4	0	2 (2.4%)	2 (1.2%)
NPL	5	0	1 (1.2%)	1 (0.6%)

Relative risk for severe visual impairment (<6/60 = very poor outcome) in aphakics compared with pseudophakics.
↵Functional vision RR = 1.64 (95% CI = 1.25–2.16).
↵Best corrected vision: RR = 2.62 (95% CI = 1.29–5.3).