Awareness of CFB scar was significantly lower in patients who did not use PG (p
📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale
🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:Aim: To assess the demographic characteristics and clinical aspects of superficial corneal foreign body (CFB) trauma, as well as to estimatethe impact of awareness of CFB scar on wearing protective goggles (PG).Materials and Methods: A total of 238 patients were enrolled in this prospective study.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:Four groups were designated, namely group 1-metalindustry workers, group 2-construction workers, group 3-workers with different occupations who had considerable risk for CFB trauma andgroup 4-miscellaneous patients with low risk for CFB trauma.Results: There were 234 (98.3%) men and four (1.7%) women in the study.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:Awareness of CFB scar was significantly lower in patients who did not use PG (p
🔬Tür:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:Alan Parametreleri
Abstract
Aim: To assess the demographic characteristics and clinical aspects of superficial corneal foreign body (CFB) trauma, as well as to estimatethe impact of awareness of CFB scar on wearing protective goggles (PG).Materials and Methods: A total of 238 patients were enrolled in this prospective study. Four groups were designated, namely group 1-metalindustry workers, group 2-construction workers, group 3-workers with different occupations who had considerable risk for CFB trauma andgroup 4-miscellaneous patients with low risk for CFB trauma.Results: There were 234 (98.3%) men and four (1.7%) women in the study. The mean age was 33.96±10.54 years (range, 3-69 years). Therewere 126 patients (52.9%) in group 1, 53 patients (22.3%) in group 2, 27 patients (11.3%) in group 3 and 32 patients (13.4%) in group 4.Seventy-nine patients (38.4%) did not use PG, while, 67 patients (32.5%) occasionally used PG, 34 patients (16.5%) frequently used PG and 26patients (12.6%) routinely used PG. Awareness of CFB scar was significantly lower in patients who did not use PG (p
🔖
Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap
AKÇAY, B. İ. S., KORKMAZ, A., GÜNEŞ, Ş. K., BAYRAKTAR, O., GÜNAY, B. Ö. (2022). Epidemiologic Evaluation and Clinical Aspects of Superficial Corneal Foreign Body Injuries at a Tertiary Referral Center in İstanbul. Eurasian Journal of Emergency Medicine, Cilt: 18 - Sayı: 2, 86–89. https://ajindex.com/articles/508030
Zimmerman DR, Shneor E, Millodot M, Gordon-Shaag A. Corneal and conjunctival injury seen in urgent care centres in Israel. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 2019;39:46-52
Ramakrishnan T, Constantinou M, Jhanji V, Vajpayee RB. Corneal metallic foreign body injuries due to suboptimal ocular protection. Arch Environ Occup Health. 2012;67:48-50
Sayegh JS, Lahham S, Woodhouse L, Seong J, McCoy CE. Creation of a Realistic Model for Removal of a Metallic Corneal Foreign Body for Less than $75. West J Emerg Med 2017;18:121-5
Ozkurt ZG, Yuksel H, Saka G, Guclu H, Evsen S, Balsak S. Metallic corneal foreign bodies: an occupational health hazard. Arq Bras Oftalmol. 2014;77:81-3
Ahmed F, House RJ, Feldman BH. Corneal Abrasions and Corneal Foreign Bodies. Prim Care. 2015;42:363-75
Lim CH, Turner A, Lim BX. Patching for corneal abrasion. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016;7:CD004764
Brock G, Gurekas V. The occasional corneal rust ring removal. Can J Rural Med. 2013;18:140-2
Fraenkel A, Lee LR, Lee GA. Managing corneal foreign bodies in office-based general practice. Aust Fam Physician. 2017;46:89-93
Brown N, Clemett R, Grey R. Corneal rust removal by electric drill. Clinical trial by comparison with manual removal. Br J Ophthalmol. 1975;59:586-9
Menghini M, Knecht PB, Kaufmann C, Kovacs R, Watson SL, Landau K, et al. Treatment of traumatic corneal abrasions: a three-arm, prospective, randomized study. Ophthalmic Res. 2013;50:13-8
Segal KL, Fleischut PM, Kim C, Levine B, Faggiani SL, Banerjee S, et al. Evaluation and treatment of perioperative corneal abrasions. J Ophthalmol. 2014;2014:901901.