Ava Hossain1, Enayet Hussain, Nahid Ferdausi, Utpal Sen, Zahirul Islam. 1. From the *Department of Ophthalmology, Green Life Medical College; and Departments of †Ophthalmology, ‡Pediatric Ophthalmology, and §Vitreo-retina, National Institute of Ophthalmology and Hospital, Dhaka, Bangladesh.
Abstract
PURPOSE: This study aimed to assess the prognostic value of ocular trauma score (OTS) in pediatric open globe injury. DESIGN: A prospective observational study was conducted. METHODS: A total of 210 patients aged 4 to 16 years (mean ± SD age, 9.30 ± 3.29 years) with open globe injury were recruited by nonrandomized purposive sampling based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Ocular trauma score variables, including visual acuity (VA), rupture, endophthalmitis, perforating injury, retinal detachment, and afferent pupillary defect, were determined and converted into OTS categories. The final VA in each category was compared with the prognostic outcome. RESULTS: Patients were categorized into 5 groups according to the OTS model, with 30 (14.28%) patients in category 1, 52 (24.77%) patients in category 2, 40 (19.05%) patients in category 3, 40 (19.05%) patients in category 4, and 48 (22.86%) patients in category 5.Forty-three (20.48%) patients had a final VA of 20/40 or greater, all of whom were in category 5. No patients in category 1 could achieve a VA of 20/40 or greater. Of the 35 (16.67%) patients who had no perception of light in follow-up visits, 28 were from category 1 and 7 were from category 2. CONCLUSIONS: Ocular trauma score has good prognostic significance if other interventions such as proper evaluation, early surgery, and proper follow-up can be ensured.
PURPOSE: This study aimed to assess the prognostic value of ocular trauma score (OTS) in pediatric open globe injury. DESIGN: A prospective observational study was conducted. METHODS: A total of 210 patients aged 4 to 16 years (mean ± SD age, 9.30 ± 3.29 years) with open globe injury were recruited by nonrandomized purposive sampling based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Ocular trauma score variables, including visual acuity (VA), rupture, endophthalmitis, perforating injury, retinal detachment, and afferent pupillary defect, were determined and converted into OTS categories. The final VA in each category was compared with the prognostic outcome. RESULTS:Patients were categorized into 5 groups according to the OTS model, with 30 (14.28%) patients in category 1, 52 (24.77%) patients in category 2, 40 (19.05%) patients in category 3, 40 (19.05%) patients in category 4, and 48 (22.86%) patients in category 5.Forty-three (20.48%) patients had a final VA of 20/40 or greater, all of whom were in category 5. No patients in category 1 could achieve a VA of 20/40 or greater. Of the 35 (16.67%) patients who had no perception of light in follow-up visits, 28 were from category 1 and 7 were from category 2. CONCLUSIONS:Ocular trauma score has good prognostic significance if other interventions such as proper evaluation, early surgery, and proper follow-up can be ensured.