Voon L W, See J, Wong T Y
Singapore National Eye Center & Eye Research Institute, Singapore.
Eye (Lond). 2001 Feb;15(Pt 1):75-81. doi: 10.1038/eye.2001.18.
To describe the epidemiology of ocular trauma from the perspective of the emergency service of a large tertiary hospital in Singapore.
A prospective survey was conducted over a 3 month period (August to October 1997) on all patients seen at the ophthalmic unit at the Singapore General Hospital's emergency service. Data on clinical presentation, type and cause of injury and use of eye protective devices (EPD) were collected via a standardised interview and examination.
A total of 870 persons presented with a diagnosis of ocular trauma, out of the 1,631 patients seen during the study period. Compared with non-trauma cases, trauma cases were more likely to be male (odds ratio (OR): 4.2, 95% confidence interval (95% CI): 3.2, 5.4), non-residents (OR: 6.2, 95% CI: 3.7, 10.5), younger than 40 years of age (OR: 3.2, 95% CI: 2.7, 4.1) and less likely to require follow-up or hospital admission (OR: 0.2, 95% CI: 0.2, 0.3). The three most common types of injuries were superficial foreign body (58.2%), corneal abrasion (24.9%) and blunt trauma (12.6%), while open globe injury occurred in only 17 cases (2%). Comparison with a 10% random sample of all cases seen in the previous 9 months (n = 284) revealed no significant time variation in the types of injuries (p = 0.63). Work-related injuries accounted for 590 (71.4%) cases, where grinding, cutting metal and drilling were the specific activities in more than 90% of the cases. In appropriate settings, only 21.7% of patients with work-related injuries used EPD; 43.7% were provided with EPD, but did not use them at the time of injury; and the remaining 34.6% reported that EPD were not provided.
Ocular trauma at the emergency service level in Singapore involved mainly young non-resident men, were work-related and associated with well-defined activities, and were generally minor. The low prevalence of EPD use reinforces the need for a review of the design and implementation of occupational eye safety programmes, especially among non-resident workers.
从新加坡一家大型三级医院急诊科的角度描述眼外伤的流行病学情况。
在1997年8月至10月的3个月期间,对新加坡总医院急诊科眼科接诊的所有患者进行了一项前瞻性调查。通过标准化访谈和检查收集有关临床表现、损伤类型和原因以及眼保护装置(EPD)使用情况的数据。
在研究期间接诊的1631例患者中,共有870人被诊断为眼外伤。与非外伤病例相比,外伤病例更可能为男性(优势比(OR):4.2,95%置信区间(95%CI):3.2,5.4)、非本地居民(OR:6.2,95%CI:3.7,10.5)、年龄小于40岁(OR:3.2,95%CI:2.7,4.1),且需要随访或住院的可能性较小(OR:0.2,95%CI:0.2,0.3)。三种最常见的损伤类型为浅表异物伤(58.2%)、角膜擦伤(24.9%)和钝挫伤(12.6%),而眼球穿通伤仅17例(2%)。与前9个月所有病例的10%随机样本(n = 284)相比,损伤类型无显著时间变化(p = 0.63)。工伤占590例(71.4%),其中超过90%的病例具体活动为磨削、切割金属和钻孔。在适当的环境中,只有21.7%的工伤患者使用了EPD;43.7%的患者配备了EPD,但受伤时未使用;其余34.6%的患者报告未配备EPD。
新加坡急诊科层面的眼外伤主要涉及年轻的非本地男性,与工作相关且与明确的活动有关,一般为轻伤。EPD使用率低凸显了对职业眼安全计划的设计和实施进行审查的必要性,尤其是在非本地工人中。