Wear Protective Eyewear Research Articles

Survey of Sun Exposure Levels, Sun Protection Behavior, and Skin Cancer Risk Awareness in Junior Tennis Players.

Despite a growing number of young adults developing skin cancers, little is known about the sun-protective behavior of high school athletes exposed to high levels of UV radiation, such as junior tennis players. To investigate the frequency and quality of their sun protective behaviors, a web-based, anonymous survey was conducted among tennis players at high school varsity matches and United States Tennis Association tournaments in Southern California. Although 92.6% of the 81 respondents indicated they play during peak sun intensity hours, 46.9% stated they do not regularly wear sunscreen, 27.2% do not routinely wear hats or visors, only 9.9% wear protective eyewear, and 4.9% wear UV-protective clothing; furthermore, 87.5% of junior tennis players stated they are not very familiar with skin cancer, but 73.8% would like to learn more about it. The results of this study demonstrate a lack of consistent sun protective behavior among junior tennis players, providing a rationale for the development of targeted educational campaigns to increase skin cancer risk awareness and more effective sun-protective behavior.

Effect of shooting glasses on earmuff attenuation measured with an acoustic test fixture for gunfire impulses

The EPA requirement for hearing protector labels is based on the decrepit ANSI S3.19-1974 standard, which prohibits the use of eyewear during the REAT testing that leads to the NRR on the product label. Firearm users are recommended to wear protective eyewear while shooting. In this presentation, we review past work regarding the effects of eyewear on earmuff performance and present results from five samples of one product that includes both eyewear and an earmuff. Impulses ranging between 139 and 178 dB peak SPL were used. Impulse Insertion Loss was less than 10 dB below 400 Hz for earmuffs alone and negligible for the earmuff and glasses condition and attenuation in the high frequencies was reduced by approximately 15 to 25 dB. Impulse peak insertion loss values per ANSI S12.42 were reduced from 21 to 39 dB for the earmuff alone to 15 to 22 dB when eye protection was added. Hearing conservation programs need to account for the deleterious effect of protective eyewear on earmuffs, and additional studies with broad combinations of earmuffs and eyewear are needed to establish the range over which eyewear can be expected to compromise earmuff attenuation.

Combat ocular trauma in counterinsurgency operations.

To identify the pattern, distribution, and causes of ocular injuries among the security personnel participating in counterinsurgency operations (CIOps). This was a multicentric, retrospective review of chart records of patients reporting to three hospitals located in the geographic region affected by CIOps. The hospital registry was examined for all patients diagnosed with any type of ocular trauma between January 1, 2016, and December 31, 2019. A standardized proforma was filled out using the case records, and entries were validated. A total of 131 ocular injuries fulfilled the criteria of the study. The mean age of the patients was 32.46 ± 10.2 years. All the patients were males. The causes of the injuries were explosive blasts in 60 eyes (45.80%), gunshot wounds in 15 eyes (11.42%), stone pelting in 16 eyes (12.21%), training-related causes in 26 eyes (29.84%), vehicular accidents in 13 eyes (9.92%), and battery blast in one eye (0.76%). Among the type of injuries, open globe injuries included 66 eyes (50.38%), closed globe injuries included 35 eyes (26.72%), isolated lid lacerations included 14 eyes (10.68%), and isolated chemical injury was seen in two eyes (1.52%). Optic nerve head avulsion was seen in two eyes (1.52%). The study revealed a considerable number of ocular injuries related to combat, with explosive bursts being the leading cause. The incidence of ocular injuries was found to be highest in zone 1. This study emphasizes the importance of the need for soldiers deployed in active CIOps regions to wear protective eyewear, such as ballistic goggles or military combat eye protection, to reduce the risk of ocular injuries.

Effects of Ionizing Radiation Exposure on Cataract among Radiation Workers of Interventional Cardiology in Indonesia

Abstract Purpose The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of radiation-induced cataracts and its correlation with radiation exposure dose and radiation protection equipment use among radiation workers of interventional cardiology. Methods This is a cross-sectional and retrospective case–control study. We included 180 subjects. The prevalence of radiation-induced cataracts was assessed using Scheimpflug analysis on the Pentacam-Oculus device. Individual cumulative radiation exposure dose and radiation protection equipment use were identified from questionnaires and personal dosimeters. Results The prevalence of radiation-induced cataracts was 16.7%. The median cumulative radiation dose was 0.8 (0.1–35.6) Gy. A positive correlation was found between cumulative radiation dose and lens density (R Spearman = 0.64). We found 83.9% of subjects used ceiling-suspended shields in 71 to 100% of their working period. However, most subjects (40.6%) did not wear protective eyewear. There was a statistically significant increasing risk of radiation-induced cataracts and unresponsive use of radiation protection equipment. Subjects using ceiling-suspended shield in only 31 to 50% of their working period increased their cataract risk by 10.8 times (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.05–111.49, p = 0.044). Meanwhile, subjects using protective eyewear in only 51 to 70% of their working period increased their cataract risk by 8.64 times (p = 0.001). Subjects who did not wear protective eyewear had an odd ratio of 164.3 (95% CI: 19.81–1363) compared to those who did. Conclusion Radiation-induced cataracts among radiation workers of interventional cardiology depended on the radiation exposure dose and the use of radiation protection equipment.

Health promotion an eye opener tool for computer vision syndrome

Background: Computer is one of the most common office tools used in a variety of institutions worldwide. Using a computer for an extended period of time put users at a higher risk of developing computer vision syndrome. The leading occupational health problem of the 21st century is computer vision syndromeMethods: This is an online-based, cross-sectional study that was conducted between June 3rd and June 14th, 2021. We selected approximately 200 computer users, both students and working, ranging in age from 10 to 40 years, who spend a significant amount of time in front of a digital screen. Data was gathered by completing an online questionnaire form about C.V.S.Results: A Google form was filled out by 200 people, both students and working professionals, and it was discovered that more than 90% of the population are aware of the negative effects of excessive screen time. Only having knowledge and being aware is insufficient to reduce CVS incidences and prevalence. Approaches to health promotion are critical in understanding the reasons for the increased prevalence of CVS. Only 41% wear protective eyewear, demonstrating negligence and the importance of a behavioural change approach in reducing CVS prevalence.Conclusions: We can conclude that excessive screen use can cause problems. People may be aware of the negative effects of screens, but they continue to ignore their eye health. Educating yourself on the ideal eye screen distance of 51 cm (20 inches) is essential, as is the use of protective eyewear.

Recognition efficiency of atypical cardiovascular readings on ECG devices through fogged goggles

In their continuing battle against the COVID-19 pandemic, medical workers in hospitals worldwide need to wear safety glasses and goggles to protect their eyes from the possible transmission of the virus. However, they work for long hours and need to wear a mask and other personal protective equipment, which causes their protective eye wear to fog up. This fogging up of eye wear, in turn, has a substantial impact in the speed and accuracy of reading information on the interface of electrocardiogram (ECG) machines. To gain a better understanding of the extent of the impact, this study experimentally simulates the fogging of protective goggles when viewing the interface with three variables: the degree of fogging of the goggles, brightness of the screen, and color of the font of the cardiovascular readings. This experimental study on the target recognition of digital font is carried out by simulating the interface of an ECG machine and readability of the ECG machine with fogged eye wear. The experimental results indicate that the fogging of the lenses has a significant impact on the recognition speed and the degree of fogging has a significant correlation with the font color and brightness of the screen. With a reduction in screen brightness, its influence on recognition speed shows a v-shaped trend, and the response time is the shortest when the screen brightness is 150 cd/m2. When eyewear is fogged, yellow and green font colors allow a quicker response with a higher accuracy. On the whole, the subjects show a better performance with the use of green font, but there are inconsistencies. In terms of the interaction among the three variables, the same results are also found and the same conclusion can be made accordingly. This research study can act as a reference for the interface design of medical equipment in events where medical staff wear protective eyewear for a long period of time.

KNOWLEDGE, ATTITUDE AND PRACTICES REGARDING OCULAR PROTECTION DURING GARDENING AMONG URBAN HOMEMAKERS OF PATNA, INDIA

Purpose: To describe the knowledge, attitude and practices of home gardeners regarding eye protection during gardening Methods: A cross-sectional questionnaire-based study was conducted among 50 female urban homemakers who maintain their domestic garden, selected through purposive convenience sampling. Semi-structured questions regarding knowledge of advantages, preference regarding type of protective wear and practices of wearing these equipment were asked and responses represented as percentages. Results: All 50 respondents completed the questionnaire and agreed that some form of eye protection was necessary during gardening (100%). The advantages of protective eyewear were enumerated as protection from dust (42%), trauma by leaves (36%), gardening tools (30%) and sunlight (22%). More respondents preferred to wear no eyewear (52%) compared to regular sun shades or prescription glasses (40%), on-ear protective goggles with side covers (4%), goggles with head bands (2%) and face shield (2%). Four respondents had already encountered some form of ocular trauma during gardening. Discomfort due to protective equipment (61.54%), poor access and cumbersome maintenance (53.85%) and difficulty in looking through the equipment (23.08%) were enlisted as reasons for no protective wear. All respondents agreed that awareness regarding eye trauma from gardening should be disseminated in apartment communities. Conclusion: While all respondents agreed that eye protection is necessary while gardening, about half of the respondents did not wear protective eyewear due to non-ergonomic designs of the equipment they had access to. There is need of increasing awareness among this population about availability of comfortable ergonomic transparent eye protection equipment suitable for use during gardening.

Floorball Injuries Presenting to a Swiss Adult Emergency Department: A Retrospective Study (2013-2019).

Background: The popularity of floorball has surged throughout Switzerland in the last 20 years. However, epidemiological studies are still scarce. Objective: To collect information on floorball-related injuries, their severity and approximate cost in adults who presented to our emergency department from 2013–2019. Moreover, to use this information to suggest possible strategies to prevent injuries. Materials and Methods: The study population includes all patients who suffered injuries related to floorball and were then seen at the University Hospital in Bern during a 7-year period. Bern University Hospital, Switzerland, has a comprehensive management system (Ecare) that was used to generate the data for this study. The data were then used to create an injury profile of all cases presented during the said period. Results: A total of 263 injures were recorded from 2013 to 2019. The most common locations for injuries were to the eyes (43.73%), followed by the lower extremities (25.48%). The mean cost per case was CHF 1191.43. However, the vast majority of admissions could be sent home (93.16%) and did not cost more than 500 CHF/case (57.41%). Of the 22 cases that cost more than CHF 2000, 10 were located around the torso and 6 affected one or both eyes. Significant differences were observed between the age groups and treatment area (p = 0.008), costs (p = 0.008), route of discharge (p = 0.023) and type of trauma (p = 0.020). Conclusion: Although floorball is still a relatively minor sport, its impact on sport-related injuries must not be underestimated. Injuries to the eyes are particularly common. In our opinion, our findings provide strong evidence that all floorball players (not only children and adolescents) should wear protective eyewear. We conclude that the Swiss Floorball Association (Swiss Unihockey) should mandate the use of protective eyewear.

Computer-Based Quality Improvement for Management of Functionally Monocular Patients

Abstract Implementing computer-based decision support can improve physician compliance for prescription of impact-resistant lenses (IRLs) in functionally monocular patients. One of the compliance-limiting factors remains performing a refraction for qualifying patients. There are an estimated 2.4 million eye injuries in the US annually, approximately 90% of which can be prevented by the use of protective eyewear.1 The American Academy of Ophthalmology (AAO) Preferred Practice Patterns for Amblyopia recommends that individuals with unilateral vision impairment with vision of 20/50 in the amblyopic eye should wear protective eyewear full time, even if they do not require optical correction.2 At Dean McGee Eye Institute (DMEI) the preferred practice is to recommend protective eyewear for all functionally monocular individuals (best-corrected vision of 20/50 with qualifying diagnoses and > 2 lines of interocular difference in visual acuity [Table 1 and 2 at www.aaojournal.org ]). We embarked on large-scale quality improvement (QI) initiative for all providers at the DMEI/University for Oklahoma Department of Ophthalmology over a seven-year period.

Microbial contamination of contact lenses after scaling and root planing using ultrasonic scalers with and without protective eyewear: A clinical and microbiological study.

Background:Ultrasonic scaler is a preferential treatment modality among the clinicians. However, the aerosol/splatter generated is a concern for patients and practitioners. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to evaluate contamination of contact lenses of the dentist after scaling and root planing using ultrasonic scalers with and without protective eyewear.Materials and Methods:Thirty patients were randomly selected for scaling and root planing and divided into 2 groups of 15 each. Group A – dentist wearing contact lenses and protective eyewear. Group B - dentist wearing only contact lenses. After scaling and root planing using ultrasonic scalers, the lenses were subjected to culture and 16S rRNA (16S ribosomal RNA) gene sequencing.Results:In Group A – 15 out of thirty samples were contaminated, in Group B – all the thirty samples were contaminated. Most of the samples showed Gram-positive bacteria and 5 samples were contaminated with fungi. 16S rRNA gene sequencing of forty contaminated samples showed that 31 were contaminated with Streptococcus mutans and 9 with Staphylococcus aureus.Conclusion:Keeping in mind the limitation of the study for the absence of negative control, we would like to conclude that dental practitioners should better avoid contact lenses in a dental setup because of the risk of contamination of the contact lenses from the various dental procedures which can produce aerosol/splatter and if worn, it is recommended to wear protective eyewear.

Current status of endoscope reprocessing in Korea.

Current status of endoscope reprocessing in Korea.

Prevalence of dry eye syndrome after a three-year exposure to a clean room.

ObjectiveTo measure the prevalence of dry eye syndrome (DES) among clean room (relative humidity ≤1%) workers from 2011 to 2013.MethodsThree annual DES examinations were performed completely in 352 clean room workers aged 20–40 years who were working at a secondary battery factory. Each examination comprised the tear-film break-up test (TFBUT), Schirmer’s test I, slit-lamp microscopic examination, and McMonnies questionnaire. DES grades were measured using the Delphi approach. The annual examination results were analyzed using a general linear model and post-hoc analysis with repeated-ANOVA (Tukey). Multiple logistic regression was performed using the examination results from 2013 (dependent variable) to analyze the effect of years spent working in the clean room (independent variable).ResultsThe prevalence of DES among these workers was 14.8% in 2011, 27.1% in 2012, and 32.8% in 2013. The TFBUT and McMonnies questionnaire showed that DES grades worsened over time. Multiple logistic regression analysis indicated that the odds ratio for having dry eyes was 1.130 (95% CI 1.012–1.262) according to the findings of the McMonnies questionnaire.ConclusionsThis 3-year trend suggests that the increased prevalence of DES was associated with longer working hours. To decrease the prevalence of DES, employees should be assigned reasonable working hours with shift assignments that include appropriate break times. Workers should also wear protective eyewear, subdivide their working process to minimize exposure, and utilize preservative-free eye drops.

Radiation Exposure of the Anesthesiologist in the Neurointerventional Suite

Scatter radiation during interventional radiology procedures can produce cataracts in participating medical personnel. Standard safety equipment for the radiologist includes eye protection. The typical configuration of fluoroscopy equipment directs radiation scatter away from the radiologist and toward the anesthesiologist. This study analyzed facial radiation exposure of the anesthesiologist during interventional neuroradiology procedures. Radiation exposure to the forehead of the anesthesiologist and radiologist was measured during 31 adult neuroradiologic procedures involving the head or neck. Variables hypothesized to affect anesthesiologist exposure were recorded for each procedure. These included total radiation emitted by fluoroscopic equipment, radiologist exposure, number of pharmacologic interventions performed by the anesthesiologist, and other variables. Radiation exposure to the anesthesiologist's face averaged 6.5 ± 5.4 μSv per interventional procedure. This exposure was more than 6-fold greater (P < 0.0005) than for noninterventional angiographic procedures (1.0 ± 1.0) and averaged more than 3-fold the exposure of the radiologist (ratio, 3.2; 95% CI, 1.8-4.5). Multiple linear regression analysis showed that the exposure of the anesthesiologist was correlated with the number of pharmacologic interventions performed by the anesthesiologist and the total exposure of the radiologist. Current guidelines for occupational radiation exposure to the eye are undergoing review and are likely to be lowered below the current 100-150 mSv/yr limit. Anesthesiologists who spend significant time in neurointerventional radiology suites may have ocular radiation exposure approaching that of a radiologist. To ensure parity with safety standards adopted by radiologists, these anesthesiologists should wear protective eyewear.

Use of Protective Eyewear in U.S. Children: Results From the National Health Interview Survey

Purpose: To study use of protective eyewear in children who participated in activities that can cause eye injury. Methods: National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) data from 2002 were used to analyze protective eyewear use by children who participated in activities that can cause eye injury. Weighted percentages and 95% confidence intervals (CI) of the sociodemographic characteristics of children who wore protective eyewear were analyzed. Odds ratios (OR) were estimated in logistic regression models. Results: In the 2002 NHIS, 3,901 children aged 6–17 years (51% of interviewed children) participated in activities that can cause eye injury, but while doing so, only 14.5% of children wore protective eyewear. After controlling for potentially confounding effects of study variables, females were less likely to wear protective eyewear than males (OR = 0.61; 95% CI: 0.48–0.76) and children aged 12–17 years were more likely to wear protective eyewear than children aged 6–8 years (12–14 year olds: OR = 1.72, 95% CI: 1.20–2.46; 15–17 year olds: OR = 1.60; 95% CI: 1.11–2.31). Race/ethnicity, parent's education, family structure, poverty status, and region of United States residence did not have significant influence on protective eyewear use. Conclusions: To achieve the Healthy People 2010 objective of 20% of children using protective eyewear in recreational activities and hazardous situations around the home, intervention/education programs must continue to be improved and implemented.

SARS Management: Lessons Learned at the University of North Carolina Health Care System

BACKGROUND: University of North Carolina Health Care System (UNCHCS) provided care for the eighth laboratory-confirmed case of SARS and a CDC special interest case (clinical symptoms without epidemiological link). The confirmed case was managed on an outpatient basis. The special interest case was critically ill and died with all laboratory tests negative for SARS, including autopsy studies. PROJECT: Hospital Epidemiology Department (ED) was responsible for the implementation of the CDC SARS recommendations. This required the coordinated effort of multiple hospital and university departments and daily contact with the local and state health departments. Due to heightened concern by coworkers of the confirmed case, a special SARS screening clinic was provided for 42 “exposed” people. RESULTS: No SARS transmission occurred. Three employees were exposed to the confirmed SARS case. One was a physician who did not wear protective eyewear during an exam, and two were environmental service workers who failed to wear appropriate protective equipment. Four employees removed their protective eyewear during a code of the special interest case and were considered exposed. LESSONS LEARNED: Use sitters to ensure correct PPE use, provide anti-fog goggles, organize SARS laboratory test kits, provide SARS reference notebook for ED, identify alternative site for outpatient screening with an outside entrance that leads directly to exam rooms, identify ventilation system of emergency transport vehicles, plan for emergency fit-testing, use telephone triage for medical referral/information combined with signs and monitors at entrances regarding SARS alert, consider use of a special SARS precautions sign, use isolation rooms with anterooms, and designate a SARS coordinator for the facility.

Knowledge, beliefs and attitudes of squash venue operators relating to use of protective eyewear

Sports venues are in a position to potentially influence the safety practices of their patrons. This study examined the knowledge, beliefs and attitudes of venue operators that could influence the use of protective eyewear by squash players. A 50% random sample of all private and public squash venues affiliated with the Victorian Squash Federation in metropolitan Melbourne was selected. Face-to-face interviews were conducted with 15 squash venue operators during August 2001. Interviews were transcribed and content and thematic analyses were performed. The content of the interviews covered five topics: (1) overall injury risk perception, (2) eye injury occurrence, (3) knowledge, behaviors, attitudes and beliefs associated with protective eyewear, (4) compulsory protective eyewear and (5) availability of protective eyewear at venues. Venue operators were mainly concerned with the severe nature of eye injuries, rather than the relatively low incidence of these injuries. Some venue operators believed that players should wear any eyewear, rather than none at all, and believed that more players should use protective eyewear. Generally, they did not believe that players with higher levels of experience and expertise needed to wear protective eyewear when playing. Only six venues had at least one type of eyewear available for players to hire or borrow or to purchase. Operators expressed a desire to be informed about correct protective eyewear. Appropriate protective eyewear is not readily available at squash venues. Better-informed venue operators may be more likely to provide suitable protective eyewear.

Late laser in situ keratomileusis flap dislocation caused by a thrown football

A 38-year-old man sustained a dislocated flap after being struck in the left eye with a football more than 30 months after uneventful laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK). Consequent epithelial ingrowth and microstriae required surgical treatment. The postoperative course was uneventful with recovery of 20/20 Snellen uncorrected visual acuity. This case illustrates the need for LASIK patients to wear protective eyewear when participating in contact sports.

Have the attitudes of Australian squash players towards protective eyewear changed over the past decade?

Objective: To assess indicative trends in the use of protective eyewear by Australian squash players and their attitudes towards its use since 1989. Methods: Data were extracted from three Australian...

CONCEPTS OF EYE PROTECTION

A reluctance by athletes to wear protective eyewear for most sports and recreational activities pervades our society today. Industry, on the other hand, has been aware of the need for eye protection and have mandated the use of safety eyewear in the workplace. Comments by professional athletes with whom the author has worked, who oppose the wearing of appropriate eye protection, include it's not macho, it's not my style, cuts down my peripheral vision, and it's like looking through a dirty windshield (the player having wiped it with a sweaty towel). Young athletes complain that wearing glasses or any eye protector looks nerdy. Unless a youngster has experienced a previous serious eye injury, some parents and coaches do not support the need for protection.

Late clear corneal wound failure after trivial trauma

A clear corneal cataract wound ruptured after trivial trauma. The wound did not meetthe criteria for wound stability as previously recommended. This case illustrates the potential public health hazard with the increasing use of clear corneal cataract surgery. Proper wound design can eliminate this risk. Patients without proper wound design should be cautioned to wear protective eyewear to avoid serious or blinding trauma.