National LASIK Satisfaction Survey Results

This report summarizes published LASIK satisfaction data, the FDA’s landmark PROWL studies, and themes from LASIK Score’s ongoing reader surveys. It is not medical advice.

The big picture: LASIK satisfaction rates

Across decades of published research, LASIK consistently ranks among the most satisfying elective procedures in medicine. The headline numbers:

• 95% or higher overall patient satisfaction is the figure most commonly cited in meta-analyses of modern LASIK outcomes. A 2016 meta-analysis published in the Journal of Cataract & Refractive Surgery reviewed 97 studies encompassing over 67,000 eyes and found a weighted satisfaction rate of 95.4%.
• Individual studies report ranges from about 92% to 98%, depending on the time frame, survey instrument, and patient population.
• Satisfaction has trended upward over the past 15 years as wavefront-guided and topography-guided platforms have improved precision, and as patient selection criteria have become more conservative.

These numbers are remarkably high for any medical intervention, but they also mean that roughly 1 in 20 patients has some degree of dissatisfaction. Understanding what drives both satisfaction and dissatisfaction is essential for informed decision-making.

The FDA PROWL studies: the most rigorous public data

What PROWL was

The Patient-Reported Outcomes With LASIK (PROWL) studies were conducted by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in collaboration with the National Eye Institute and the Department of Defense. They represent the most methodologically rigorous publicly funded assessment of LASIK patient-reported outcomes.

Two parallel studies were conducted:

• PROWL-1: Military personnel undergoing LASIK at the Walter Reed National Military Medical Center. Enrolled 262 active-duty participants.
• PROWL-2: Civilian patients undergoing LASIK at five private practices across the United States. Enrolled 312 participants.

What PROWL measured

Both studies used validated questionnaires administered before surgery and at one and three months post-operatively. Key outcome domains included:

• Visual function and symptoms: Difficulty with glare, halos, starbursts, ghosting, and double vision under various conditions (driving at night, working on screens, reading).
• Dry eye symptoms: Using the Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI) and other standardized instruments.
• Activity limitations: Whether visual symptoms interfered with daily activities, work, or recreation.
• Overall satisfaction: Direct questions about whether the patient was satisfied, would choose LASIK again, and whether expectations were met.

Key PROWL findings

At three months post-operatively:

• Satisfaction: Over 95% of participants in both PROWL-1 and PROWL-2 reported satisfaction with their surgical outcomes.
• Visual symptoms: Approximately 40-45% of patients reported at least one new visual symptom (such as halos or starbursts) that was not present before surgery. However, most rated these symptoms as mild and not bothersome.
• Bothersome symptoms: About 1-2% of participants reported that new visual symptoms were “very bothersome,” a critical distinction from the higher prevalence of any symptoms at all.
• Dry eye: New dry eye symptoms were reported by approximately 28% of participants at three months. Most cases were mild. Pre-existing dry eye symptoms were actually more predictive of post-operative dissatisfaction than any surgical variable.
• Activity limitations: Less than 1% of participants reported that visual symptoms prevented them from performing any daily activity at three months.

Why PROWL matters

Before PROWL, most LASIK satisfaction data came from surgeon-sponsored or industry-sponsored studies, which critics argued might overstate satisfaction. PROWL was publicly funded, used validated instruments, and enrolled patients prospectively. Its findings largely confirmed the high satisfaction rates seen in earlier literature, while providing more granular data about the types and severity of side effects.

What the broader published literature shows

Visual acuity outcomes

Modern LASIK outcomes for visual acuity are well documented:

• 20/20 or better uncorrected: Achieved by 90-95% of patients with myopia up to -6.00 diopters at 12 months.
• 20/40 or better uncorrected (legal driving standard): Achieved by over 99% of patients.
• Within 0.50 diopters of target refraction: 85-95% of patients, depending on the starting prescription and platform used.
• Enhancement rates: 3-10% of patients undergo a second procedure (touch-up) within the first year, with rates higher for larger initial corrections and hyperopic treatments.

Quality of life measures

Studies using standardized quality-of-life instruments (NEI-VFQ-25, QIRC) consistently show statistically significant improvements after LASIK in:

• Driving (especially night driving for patients who had difficulty with glasses fogging or contact lens dryness)
• Sports and outdoor activities
• Convenience and morning routine
• Self-image and confidence

Dry eye trajectory

Dry eye after LASIK follows a predictable trajectory in most patients:

• Week 1: Nearly universal dryness; managed with frequent preservative-free tears.
• Month 1: Moderate dryness in 40-60% of patients.
• Month 3: Mild dryness in 20-30% of patients. This is the PROWL measurement point.
• Month 6-12: Dryness rates return to near pre-operative levels for most patients. A small subset (estimated 1-5%) has persistent dryness beyond one year.

Night vision symptoms

Halos, starbursts, and glare are the most commonly discussed side effects:

• Incidence of any symptoms: 20-40% of patients notice some change in night vision quality, especially in the first three months.
• Incidence of bothersome symptoms: 3-8% at three months; 1-3% at twelve months.
• Risk factors: Larger pupils relative to treatment zone, higher initial prescriptions, and thinner corneas correlate with more night symptoms.
• Modern mitigation: Larger optical zones, wavefront-optimized profiles, and topography-guided treatments have reduced night symptom rates compared to early LASIK technology.

Methodology: how LASIK Score surveys work

LASIK Score conducts periodic reader surveys to complement the published clinical literature. Our methodology:

Recruitment

Respondents are drawn from site visitors, directory users, and readers who opt in through email. We do not recruit exclusively through partner clinics, which helps reduce selection bias (clinics are naturally more likely to share surveys with satisfied patients).

Eligibility and verification

• Respondents must have had LASIK (not PRK or other procedures) within a defined time window, typically within the past 12 months.
• We use screening questions to verify basic procedural details (technology type, surgeon name, approximate date).
• Responses are anonymous but deduplicated using device fingerprinting and email confirmation.

Quality controls

• Attention-check questions are embedded to identify careless or bot responses.
• Responses completed in under a minimum time threshold are flagged for review.
• Open-ended responses are reviewed for coherence and specificity.

Demographics of recent respondents

Our most recent survey waves have captured respondents broadly representative of the LASIK population:

• Age: Median 32 years; range 21-58. Approximately 60% aged 25-39.
• Gender: Roughly 55% female, 45% male.
• Pre-operative prescription: Median -4.00 diopters myopia; range -1.00 to -10.00.
• Geography: Respondents from 38 states, with higher representation in metros with more LASIK centers (consistent with population distribution).

Reporting

• We report medians and interquartile ranges for quantitative measures where sample sizes permit (n > 50).
• For smaller subgroups, we report qualitative themes rather than precise percentages to avoid overstating statistical precision.
• We clearly distinguish our proprietary survey data from published clinical literature.

Year-over-year trends

Based on both published literature trends and our own data:

• Satisfaction is stable or slightly increasing. The shift from mechanical microkeratome flaps to femtosecond laser flaps, the adoption of wavefront-guided treatments, and better patient selection have all contributed.
• Dry eye complaints are decreasing. Improved pre-operative screening and aggressive surface optimization before surgery have reduced the incidence and severity of post-LASIK dry eye.
• Night symptom complaints are decreasing. Larger treatment zones and customized ablation profiles have made a measurable difference.
• Pricing transparency is improving. Patients who understand what their quote includes report higher satisfaction with their clinic experience, independent of visual outcomes.

How to interpret satisfaction data

Aggregate satisfaction numbers are useful for understanding the procedure’s track record, but they have limitations:

• Survivorship bias. Surveys typically capture patients who showed up for follow-up. Patients who are unhappy may disengage from their clinic and not respond to surveys.
• Timeframe matters. Satisfaction measured at one month (when dryness and halos are common) is lower than satisfaction at twelve months. Always note the measurement point.
• “Satisfied” is not “perfect.” A patient who rates their experience as “satisfied” may still have mild residual symptoms. Satisfaction data does not mean every patient achieves perfect vision.
• Your eyes are not average. A 95% satisfaction rate means that statistically, about 1 in 20 patients is not fully satisfied. Your individual risk depends on your specific prescription, corneal anatomy, tear film, and surgeon.
• Surgeon and technology selection matter. Published outcomes reflect a mix of surgeons and platforms. Higher-volume surgeons using current-generation technology tend to have outcomes at the upper end of the published range.

What to ask your clinic

• What are your specific outcomes for eyes like mine (same prescription range and corneal characteristics)?
• What is your enhancement rate?
• How do you manage patients with dry eye or night symptoms that persist beyond three months?
• What follow-up schedule do you use, and how long does your aftercare window extend?
• Do you have your own patient satisfaction data you can share?

Themes we consistently see

• High convenience gains. Freedom from glasses and contacts is the most frequently cited benefit across every survey and study.
• Early side effects are common but usually temporary. Dryness and night artifacts bother many patients in the first month but resolve for the vast majority by six months.
• Communication predicts satisfaction. Clinics that set clear, honest expectations about recovery timelines and potential side effects have higher satisfaction scores than clinics that overpromise.
• Enhancement policies matter. Patients who understand their clinic’s enhancement policy before surgery report less anxiety and higher satisfaction if a touch-up is needed.

We publish updated survey results as more data accrues and methods evolve. Our goal is transparent, actionable insights you can bring to your consultation.

Related guides

• LASIK Risks, Complications, and How Surgeons Mitigate Them
• Is LASIK Worth It?
• LASIK Enhancements: Rates, Policies, and Costs
• How to Choose a LASIK Surgeon: Credentials, Volume, and Tech
• LASIK Data Methodology: How LASIK Score Sources and Audits Listings

Sources

• Solomon KD, et al. “LASIK world literature review: quality of life and patient satisfaction.” Ophthalmology. 2009.
• Sandoval HP, et al. “Modern LASIK outcomes.” Journal of Cataract & Refractive Surgery. 2016; 42(8): 1224-1234.
• U.S. Food and Drug Administration. “LASIK Quality of Life Collaboration Project (PROWL).” FDA.gov. 2014-2017.
• Eydelman M, et al. “Symptoms and satisfaction of patients in the Patient-Reported Outcomes With LASIK (PROWL) studies.” JAMA Ophthalmology. 2017; 135(1): 13-22.
• Price MO, et al. “Three-year longitudinal survey comparing visual satisfaction with LASIK and contact lenses.” Ophthalmology. 2016.
• American Academy of Ophthalmology. “Refractive Errors & Refractive Surgery Preferred Practice Pattern.” 2023.
• Schallhorn SC, et al. “Patient-reported outcomes five years after LASIK.” Journal of Refractive Surgery. 2022.