PURPOSE: The incidence of sports associated ocular injuries presenting to emergency departments is rising. Despite this, eye protection is not widely used in the general population. This survey was conducted to determine the spectrum of ocular sports injuries that presented to the emergency department of an ophthalmic hospital, which serves a large sector of inner city London. The role of eye protection in preventing ocular sports injuries was also investigated. METHODS: All patients who attended the emergency department with sports associated ocular injuries between May and July 2008 were identified. Medical records of these patients were examined. RESULTS: There were a total of 16999 ophthalmic emergency attendances. 48 (0.28%) patients presented with sports related ocular injuries. The outcomes of the consultations were: 13 (27.1%) patients discharged from the emergency department, 17 (35.4%) had reviews arranged in the emergency department, 18 (37.5%) referred to subspecialties. The mean presenting LogMAR visual acuities of patients that were discharged, reviewed in the emergency department, and referred to subspecialties were 0.01 (±0.33), 0.48 (±0.75), and 0.31 (±0.61) respectively. Visual acuities were better by 0.39 (95% CI 0.01-0.77, p=0.042) in patients who were discharged compared to patients who were reviewed in the emergency department or referred to subspecialties. Evaluation of records revealed that no patients wore eye protection and none were given advice regarding prevention of future injuries. CONCLUSION: Results from this survey show that ocular sports injuries account for a proportion of ophthalmic emergency attendances with a potential impact on service provision. It is essential that ophthalmologists, optometrists and other healthcare professionals are aware of the potential ocular morbidity from sports trauma and the importance of providing advice on the prevention of such injuries.
PURPOSE: The incidence of sports associated ocular injuries presenting to emergency departments is rising. Despite this, eye protection is not widely used in the general population. This survey was conducted to determine the spectrum of ocular sports injuries that presented to the emergency department of an ophthalmic hospital, which serves a large sector of inner city London. The role of eye protection in preventing ocular sports injuries was also investigated. METHODS: All patients who attended the emergency department with sports associated ocular injuries between May and July 2008 were identified. Medical records of these patients were examined. RESULTS: There were a total of 16999 ophthalmic emergency attendances. 48 (0.28%) patients presented with sports related ocular injuries. The outcomes of the consultations were: 13 (27.1%) patients discharged from the emergency department, 17 (35.4%) had reviews arranged in the emergency department, 18 (37.5%) referred to subspecialties. The mean presenting LogMAR visual acuities of patients that were discharged, reviewed in the emergency department, and referred to subspecialties were 0.01 (±0.33), 0.48 (±0.75), and 0.31 (±0.61) respectively. Visual acuities were better by 0.39 (95% CI 0.01-0.77, p=0.042) in patients who were discharged compared to patients who were reviewed in the emergency department or referred to subspecialties. Evaluation of records revealed that no patients wore eye protection and none were given advice regarding prevention of future injuries. CONCLUSION: Results from this survey show that ocular sports injuries account for a proportion of ophthalmic emergency attendances with a potential impact on service provision. It is essential that ophthalmologists, optometrists and other healthcare professionals are aware of the potential ocular morbidity from sports trauma and the importance of providing advice on the prevention of such injuries.
Authors: Sungbae Moon; Hyun Wook Ryoo; Jae Yun Ahn; Jung Bae Park; Kang Suk Seo; Sang Do Shin; Kyoung Jun Song; Kang Hyun Lee; In Sool Yoo; Jin Seong Cho; Hyun Ho Ryu; Tae Oh Jeong; Seok Ran Yeom; Young Taek Kim; Sung Ok Hong Journal: Int J Ophthalmol Date: 2016-10-18 Impact factor: 1.779