Abstract
Study objective: We compare percentage of healing, comfort, and complications in children with corneal abrasions treated with an eye patch versus no eye patch. Methods: We performed a randomized clinical trial of patients aged 3 to 17 years who were diagnosed with isolated corneal abrasion. Patients were randomly assigned to an eye patch or no patch group. Abrasion size was documented with digital photographs and/or an eye template diagram at presentation and at 20- to 24-hour follow-up examination. A reviewer masked to treatment group determined percent healing by measuring presentation and follow-up abrasion sizes on the photographs/template. At follow-up, interference with activities of daily living (ADL) was measured with a visual analog scale and the number of pain medication doses taken since presentation was recorded. Results: A total of 37 patients were enrolled: 17 with an eye patch and 18 with no eye patch. The mean patient age was 10 years, and two thirds of the patients were male. The majority (86%) of patients had 95% or more healing at follow-up, and there was no significant difference in percent healing between the 2 groups, even when adjusted for age and initial abrasion size (95% confidence interval [CI] for the difference in means −11 to 8 and −13 to 5, respectively). There was no difference between groups for number of pain medication doses required. Among measurements of interference with ADL, only the difficulty walking score was found to be significantly different between groups (patch mean 1.7 cm [SD 2.1 cm] versus no patch mean 0.3 cm [SD 0.7 cm]; 95% CI for the difference in means 0.3 to 2.5). Conclusion: This study suggests that eye patching in children with corneal abrasions makes no difference in the rate of healing. There was no difference in discomfort and interference with ADL, other than greater difficulty walking in the patch group, and there were no complications in either group. [Michael JG, Hug D, Dowd MD. Management of corneal abrasion in children: a randomized clinical trial. Ann Emerg Med. July 2002;40:67-72.]
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
