Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

The epidemiology of ocular trauma in Singapore: Perspective from the emergency service of a large tertiary hospital

Abstract

Purpose To describe the epidemiology of ocular trauma from the perspective of the emergency service of a large tertiary hospital in Singapore.

Methods 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.

Results A total of 870 persons presented with a diagnosis of ocular trauma, out of the 1631 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.

Conclusions 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.

References

  1. Thylefors B . Epidemiological patterns of ocular trauma. Aust NZ J Ophthalmol 1992;20:95–8.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Glynn RJ, Seddon JM, Berlin BM . The incidence of eye injuries in New England adults. Arch Ophthalmol 1988;106:785–9.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Karlson TA, Klein BEK . The incidence of acute hospital-treated eye injuries. Arch Ophthalmol 1986;106:785–9.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Katz J, Tielsch JM . Lifetime prevalence of ocular injuries from the Baltimore Eye Survey. Arch Ophthalmol 1993;111:1564–8.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Schein OD, Hibberd PL, Shingleton BJ, et al. The spectrum and burden of ocular injury. Ophthalmology 1988;95:300–5.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Zagelbaum BM, Tostanoski JR, Kerner DJ, Hersh PS . Urban eye trauma: a one-year prospective study. Ophthalmology 1993;100:851–6.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Klopfer J, Tielsch JM, Vitale S, et al. Ocular trauma in the United States: eye injuries resulting in hospitalization, 1984 through 1987. Arch Ophthalmol 1992;110:838–42.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Tielsch JM, Parver L, Shankar B . Time trends in the incidence of hospitalized ocular trauma. Arch Ophthalmol 1989;107:519–23.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Blomdahl S, Norell S . Perforating eye injury in the Stockholm population. Acta Ophthalmol 1984;62:378–90.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Desai P, MacEwen CJ, Baines P, Minassian DC . Incidence of cases of ocular trauma admitted to hospital and incidence of blinding outcome. Br J Ophthalmol 1996;80:592–6.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Macewan CJ . Eye injuries: a prospective survey of 5671 cases. Br J Ophthalmol 1989;73:888–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. McCarty CA, Fu CL, Taylor HR . Epidemiology of ocular trauma in Australia. Ophthalmology 1999;106:1847–52.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Fong LP . Eye injuries in Victoria, Australia. Med J Aust 1995;162:64–8.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Verma N, Verma A, Jacob G, Demok S . Profile of ocular trauma in Papua New Guinea. Aust NZ J Ophthalmol 1997;25:151–5.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Gothwal VK, Adolph S, Jalali S, Naduvilath TJ . Demography and prognostic factors of ocular injuries in South India. Aust N Z J Ophthalmol 1999;27:318–25.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Wong TY, Tielsch JM . A population-based study on the incidence of severe ocular trauma in Singapore. Am J Ophthalmol 1999;128:345–51.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Wong TY, Tielsch JM . Epidemiology of ocular trauma. In: Tasman W, Jaeger EA, editors. Duane's foundations of clinical ophthalmology, vol 5. Philadelphia: JB Lippincott, 1998:56:1–56.

  18. Baker RS, Wilson RM, Flowers CW Jr, Lee DA, Wheeler NC . A population-based survey of hospitalized work-related ocular injury: diagnoses, cause of injury, resource utilization and hospitalization outcome. Ophthalmic Epidemiol 1999;6:159–69.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Baker RS, Wilson MR, Flowers CW, Lee DA, Wheeler NC . Demographic factors in a population-based survey of hospitalized work-related, ocular injury. Am J Ophthalmol 1996;122:213–9.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Dannenberg AL, Parver LM, Brechner RJ, Khoo L . Penetrating eye injuries in the workplace. Arch Ophthalmol 1992;110:843–8.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  21. The World Bank. World development report 1997. The state in a changing world. Washington, DC: Oxford University Press, 1997:214–5.

  22. Ministry of Manpower, Singapore. Ministry of Manpower annual report 1997/1998. Singapore, 1999.

  23. Fong LP, Taouk Y . The role of eye protection in work-related eye injuries. Aust N Z J Ophthalmol 1995;23:101–6.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Griffith GAP, Jones NP . Eye injury and eye protection: a survey of the chemical industry. Occup Med 1994;44:37–40.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Liu C, Davison C, Cooling R . Eye protection in the metal-working industry. Br J Ophthalmol 1990;301:1048.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Owen CG, Margrain TH, Woodward EG . Aetiology and prevalence of eye injuries within the United Kingdom fire service. Eye 1995;9:54–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Wong TY, Lincoln AE, Tielsch JM, Baker SP . Epidemiology of ocular injury in a major US automobile company. Eye 1998;12:870–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Wong TY, Seet B . A behavioural analysis of eye protection use in soldiers. Military Med 1997;162:744–8.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Department of Statistics, Singapore. General household survey 1995: socio-demographic and economic characteristics. Singapore, 1996.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tien Yin Wong.

Additional information

Presentation: Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology, Fort Lauderdale, USA, 10-15 May 1998

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Voon, L., See, J. & Wong, T. The epidemiology of ocular trauma in Singapore: Perspective from the emergency service of a large tertiary hospital. Eye 15, 75–81 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1038/eye.2001.18

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/eye.2001.18

Keywords

  • Eye injury
  • Eye protective device
  • Occupational eye injury
  • Ocular trauma

Further reading

Search

Quick links