Eye patch treatment for the pain of corneal abrasion

Topical pain control for corneal abrasions: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

Corneal abrasions are common ophthalmic presentations to emergency departments. Among emergency physicians and ophthalmologists, there are highly variable practice patterns with regard to management of resultant pain and discomfort. The goal of this study was to review and analyze the efficacy and safety of topical pain therapies for corneal abrasions, including topical anesthetics, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), cycloplegics, steroids, pressure patching, and the use of a bandage contact lens (BCL).

METHODS

The review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. The protocol was established a priori and published on PROSPERO (CRD42020201288). MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and Web of Science were searched until December 31, 2020. Primary studies comparing topical pain therapies to another therapy or control were included. Primary outcomes included percentage of corneal abrasions healed at 24, 48, and 72 hours, as well as pain control at 24 and 48 hours. Secondary outcomes included use of oral analgesia and incidence of complications. Risk of bias was assessed using validated tools. Quality of evidence was assessed using the GRADE methodology.

RESULTS

Overall, 33 studies (31 randomized controlled trials [RCTs], two cohort studies) comprising 4,167 patients with corneal abrasions were analyzed. Only the data for topical NSAIDs were of adequate evidence from which to draw conclusions; topical NSAIDs demonstrated significantly reduced pain scores at 24 hours (standardized mean differences [SMD] -0.69, 95% CI = -0.98 to -0.41) and 48 hours (SMD = -0.56, 95% CI = -1.02 to -0.10) as well as 53% (95% CI = 34% to 67%) lower oral analgesia use compared to control. Based on available data, topical anesthetics, cycloplegics, patching, and the use of a BCL did not result in any significant difference in pain scores or use of oral analgesia, while no studies examined topical steroids. No interventions resulted in healing delays or significantly higher rates of complications compared to controls.

CONCLUSIONS

There was strong evidence to support that topical NSAIDs reduce pain associated with corneal abrasions in the first 48 hours and the need for oral analgesia. The existing evidence was insufficient to support or refute the use of topical anesthetics, cycloplegics, steroids, or BCL for pain control in corneal abrasions. Pressure patching was ineffective at pain reduction and may increase the risk of complications. Delays in healing or other complications were not significantly different between any intervention or control for simple, uncomplicated corneal abrasions; however, larger RCTs are required to identify any differences in rare complications.

Diabetic keratopathy: Insights and challenges

Ocular complications from diabetes mellitus are common. Diabetic keratopathy, the most frequent clinical condition affecting the human cornea, is a potentially sight-threatening condition caused mostly by epithelial disturbances that are of clinical and research attention because of their severity. Diabetic keratopathy exhibits several clinical manifestations, including persistent corneal epithelial erosion, superficial punctate keratopathy, delayed epithelial regeneration, and decreased corneal sensitivity, that may lead to compromised visual acuity or permanent vision loss. The limited amount of clinical studies makes it difficult to fully understand the pathobiology of diabetic keratopathy. Effective therapeutic approaches are elusive. We summarize the clinical manifestations of diabetic keratopathy and discuss available treatments and up-to-date research studies in an attempt to provide a thorough overview of the disorder.

Perioperative Corneal Abrasion: Updated Guidelines for Prevention and Management

Corneal abrasion is the most common ocular complication in surgery. Treatment requires pain control, antimicrobial prophylaxis, and close monitoring. Pain improves significantly after 24 hours and should be resolved by 48 hours. Persistent, worsening, or new symptoms warrant immediate specialist consultation. The authors review the pathophysiology of perioperative corneal abrasion, and propose updated evidence-based guidelines for improved patient care.

Patching for corneal abrasion

BACKGROUND

Published audits have demonstrated that corneal abrasions are a common presenting eye complaint. Eye patches are often recommended for treating corneal abrasions despite the lack of evidence for their use. This systematic review was conducted to determine the effects of the eye patch when used to treat corneal abrasions.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this review was to assess the effects of patching for corneal abrasion on healing and pain relief.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Trials Register) (2016, Issue 4), Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid MEDLINE In-Process and Other Non-Indexed Citations, Ovid MEDLINE Daily, Ovid OLDMEDLINE (January 1946 to May 2016), EMBASE (January 1980 to May 2016), Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature Database (LILACS) (January 1982 to May 2016), System for Information on Grey Literature in Europe (OpenGrey) (January 1995 to May 2016), the ISRCTN registry (www.isrctn.com/editAdvancedSearch), ClinicalTrials.gov (www.clinicaltrials.gov) and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (www.who.int/ictrp/search/en). We did not use any date or language restrictions in the electronic searches for trials. We last searched the electronic databases on 9 May 2016. We also searched the reference lists of included studies, unpublished 'grey' literature and conference proceedings and contacted pharmaceutical companies for details of unpublished trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials that compared patching the eye with no patching to treat simple corneal abrasions.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed the risk of bias and extracted data. Investigators were contacted for further information regarding the quality of trials. The primary outcome was healing at 24, 48 and 72 hours while secondary outcomes included measures of pain, quality of life and adverse effects. We graded the certainty of the evidence using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 12 trials which randomised a total of 1080 participants in the review. Four trials were conducted in the United Kingdom, another four in the United States of America, two in Canada, one in Brazil and one in Switzerland. Seven trials were at high risk of bias in one or more domains and one trial was judged to be low risk of bias in all domains. The rest were a combination of low risk or unclear.People receiving a patch may be less likely to have a healed corneal abrasion after 24 hours compared to those not receiving a patch (risk ratio (RR) 0.89, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.79 to 1.00, 7 trials, 531 participants, low certainty evidence). Similar numbers of people in the patch and no-patch groups were healed by 48 hours (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.02, 6 trials, 497 participants, moderate certainty evidence) and 72 hours (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.05, 4 trials, 430 participants, moderate certainty evidence). Participants receiving a patch took slightly longer to heal but the difference was small and probably unimportant (mean difference (MD) 0.14 days longer, 95% CI 0 to 0.27 days longer, 6 trials, 642 participants, moderate certainty evidence).Ten trials reported pain scores. Most studies reported pain on a visual analogue scale (VAS). It was not possible to pool the data because it was skewed. In general, similar pain ratings were seen between patch and no-patch groups. Data from two trials reporting presence or absence of pain at 24 hours was inconclusive. There was a higher risk of reported pain in the patch group but wide confidence intervals compatible with higher or lower risk of pain (RR 1.51, 95% CI 0.86 to 2.65, 2 trials, 193 participants, low certainty evidence). Five trials compared analgesic use between the patch and no-patch groups. Data from three of these trials could be combined and suggested similar analgesic use in the patch and no-patch groups but with some uncertainty (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.32, 256 participants, low certainty evidence). Frequently reported symptoms included photophobia, lacrimation, foreign body sensation and blurred vision but there was little evidence to suggest any difference in these symptoms in people with or without a patch.Activities of daily living (ADL) were assessed in one study involving children. There was little difference in ADL with the exception of walking which was reported to be more difficult with a patch on: VAS 1.7 cm (SD 2.1) versus 0.3 cm (SD 0.7).Complication rates were low across studies and there is uncertainty about the relative effects of patching or not patching with respect to these (RR 3.24, 95% CI 0.87 to 12.05, 8 trials, 660 participants, low certainty evidence). Three trials reporting rates of compliance to treatment found that 22% of participants did not have their eye patches during follow-up. No-patch groups generally received more adjuvant treatment with antibiotics or cycloplegics, or both, than the patch group. There were limited data on the effect of patching on abrasions greater than 10mm(2) in size.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Trials included in this review suggest that treating simple corneal abrasions with a patch may not improve healing or reduce pain. It must be noted that, in these trials, participants who did not receive a patch were more likely to receive additional treatment, for example with antibiotics. Overall we judged the certainty of evidence to be moderate to low. Further research should focus on designing and implementing better quality trials and examining the effectiveness of patching for large abrasions.

A practical approach to ocular pain for the non-ophthalmologist

Pain involving the eye has numerous etiologies and is a feared challenge of many clinicians. Between a fear of the patient losing vision and a lack of familiarity with the ophthalmic equipment necessary to diagnose the problem, working up eye pain can be a daunting task. While the ophthalmologist can be indispensable in challenging cases of eye pain, this article will help clarify the unique clinical features of each etiology that can help clinicians narrow down the differential and arrive at a diagnosis.

Lack of consensus on corneal abrasion management: results of a national survey

Objectives:

Our objective was to determine the practice patterns of Canadian emergency physicians with respect to the management of traumatic corneal abrasions.

Methods:

After developing our instrument and pilot testing it on a sample of emergency residents, we randomly surveyed 470 members of the Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians, using a modified Dillman technique. We distributed a pre-notification letter, an 18-item survey, and appropriate follow-up surveys to non-responders. Those members with an email address (n= 400) received a Web-based survey, and those without (n= 70) received a survey by post. The survey focused on the indications and utilization of analgesics (oral and topical), cycloplegics, eye patches and topical antibiotics.

Results:

Our response rate was 64% (301/470), and the median age of respondents was 38 years. Most (77.7%) were male, 71.8% were full-time emergency physicians, 76.5% were emergency medicine certified, and 64.4% practised in teaching hospitals. Pain management preferences (offered usually or always) included oral analgesics (82.1%), cycloplegics (65.1%) and topical nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) (52.8%). Only 21.6% of respondents performed patching, and most (71.2%) prescribed topical antibiotics, particularly for contact lens wearers and patients with ocular foreign bodies. Two-thirds of the respondents provided tetanus toxoid if a foreign body was present, and 46.2% did so even if a foreign body was not present. Most respondents (88.0%) routinely arranged follow-up.

Conclusions:

This national survey of emergency physicians demonstrates a lack of consensus on the management of traumatic corneal abrasions. Further study is indicated to determine the optimal treatment, particularly regarding the use of topical NSAIDs.

Corneal abrasion: assessment and management

Corneal abrasions result from a superficial lesion to the most anterior aspect of the eye, the corneal epithelium. Patients can present to the GP with an array of symptoms including pain, foreign body sensation, decreased visual acuity/blurring, epiphora (excess watering) and photophobia. Most corneal abrasions are self-limiting and appropriate management can be instituted in the GP surgery. However, some require referral for specialist ophthalmology assessment. This article looks at the assessment and management of corneal abrasions and provides evidence-based guidance for ophthalmology referral.

Pain of ocular and periocular origin

Most diseases of the eye and periocular regions that cause blindness are relatively painless. Headache pain of ocular and periocular origin represent a special challenge to the clinician. For patients with ocular and periocular pain that is unrelated to primary eye disease, identification and treatment of the painful condition usually become the responsibility of the clinician.

Is treatment of feline hypertrophic cardiomyopathy based in science or faith? A survey of cardiologists and a literature search

PRACTICAL RELEVANCE

Feline hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) is the most common cardiac disease of cats. Treatment of HCM is usually directed at controlling signs of congestive heart failure (CHF), preventing occurrence or recurrence of systemic thromboembolism or delaying/preventing/reversing progression of subclinical disease.

STUDY OBJECTIVE AND DESIGN

Despite the laudable goals of therapy, however, little objective evidence supporting therapeutic decisions has been published. We, therefore, hypothesized that cardiologists base their treatment strategies on information other than published clinically relevant science. To gain insight into therapeutic decisions that cardiologists and clinicians with an interest in cardiology (n=99) make for cats with HCM, and on what information they base these decisions, we presented participants with, and asked them to select therapy for, 12 hypothetical scenarios of HCM (± CHF). Responses and justifications for treatment choices were compiled and compared with the results of a comprehensive literature search for published information about treatment of feline HCM.

FINDINGS

Evaluation of the therapeutic strategies chosen for these hypothetical cases of HCM suggests that cardiologists or clinicians with a strong interest in cardiology often prescribe treatments knowing that little documented evidence supports their decisions.

Corneal abrasion

CLINICAL QUESTION

What is the best treatment for traumatic corneal abrasion?

RESULTS

Eye patching does not reduce pain in patients with corneal abrasions. Topical diclofenac does reduce pain in patients with corneal abrasions

IMPLEMENTATION

Pitfalls to avoid when treating abrasions: Treatment of small abrasions Treatment of larger abrasions When to refer for specialist treatment.

Patching for corneal abrasion

BACKGROUND

Recent audits show that corneal abrasion is a common presenting eye complaint. Eye patches are often recommended for treating corneal abrasions despite the lack of evidence for their use. This systematic review was conducted to determine the effects of the eye patch when used to treat corneal abrasions.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this review was to test the hypothesis that patching an eye following a corneal abrasion improves healing or provides pain relief.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Group Trials Register) on The Cochrane Library (2005, Issue 2), MEDLINE (1966 to April 2005), EMBASE (1980 to April 2005), LILACS (13 April 2005), NRR (2005, Issue 2) and SIGLE (December 2004). There were no language or date restrictions in the searches. We also searched the reference lists of included studies, unpublished 'grey' literature and conference proceedings and contacted pharmaceutical companies for details of unpublished trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials that compared patching the eye with no patching to treat simple corneal abrasions.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. We contacted investigators for further information regarding quality of trials. The primary outcome was healing of the corneal epithelium and secondary outcomes were related to pain.

MAIN RESULTS

Eleven trials, which randomised a total of 1014 participants, were included in the review. Meta-analysis of seven studies with dichotomous healing outcomes favoured no patching on the first day of healing (risk ratio (RR) 0.89, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.79 to 0.99). For days two and three there was no significant difference between the two groups. Of the nine trials that measured pain scores two favoured no patching and none favoured patching. Complication rates were low and no differences were noted in these between the two groups. No-patch groups generally received more adjuvant treatment with antibiotics and/or cycloplegics than the patch group which is an important confounding factor.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Treating simple corneal abrasions with a patch does not improve healing rates on the first day post-injury and does not reduce pain. In addition, use of patches results in a loss of binocular vision. Therefore it is recommended that patches should not be used for simple corneal abrasions. Further research should focus on large (greater than 10 mm(2)) abrasions.

Management of corneal abrasion in children: a randomized clinical trial

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.

The stamler lid splint: a new short-term technique for achieving therapeutic ptosis

PURPOSE

To provide an introduction to a new device, the Stamler lid splint (SLS), a disposable appliance designed to create a temporary total therapeutic ptosis. We also describe the indications for its use and analyze its limitations.

METHODS

The utility of the SLS in effecting complete ptosis was examined in 33 patients. Outcome parameters examined were mean duration of (induced) ptosis, success (and failure) rate, and the incidence of side effects.

RESULTS

The most common indications for using the SLS were lid closure abnormalities (n = 6) and epithelial defects after keratoplasty (n = 5). The induced ptosis lasted for a mean of 3.3 days (range, 1.5-6). The success rate of the SLS in achieving a total ptosis was 90.9%. Failure was attributed to the presence of atypical lid or orbital anatomy. No patient developed a complication specifically related to the SLS itself.

CONCLUSIONS

The SLS is an inexpensive, quick, and technically straightforward means of treating a variety of ocular surface disorders in compliant patients with normal lid and orbital anatomy. The SLS is best suited to patients who require short-term therapy only.

Efficacy of eye patching for traumatic corneal abrasions: a controlled clinical trial

STUDY OBJECTIVE

We sought to evaluate the efficacy of eye patching in the treatment of traumatic corneal abrasions in terms of time to healing and reduction in pain and discomfort.

METHODS

One hundred sixty-three patients presenting at the emergency department of a large university-affiliated hospital with traumatic corneal abrasions were included in this single-blind prospective controlled trial. Eligible patients were assigned to 1 of 2 treatment regimens: topical antibiotic ointment and occlusive patch over the affected eye (n=82) or topical antibiotic ointment 4 times a day without an occlusive patch (n=81). Patients were reexamined every 24 hours until corneal healing occurred. Healing evaluation was performed by the emergency physician, using a slit lamp with fluorescein staining, without knowledge of the patient's assignment to a treatment group. The degree of discomfort was assessed at each visit by using a visual analog scale.

RESULTS

Both treatment groups were similar regarding size of the corneal lesions, delay from trauma to first ED visit, presence of foreign body or siderosis, initial degree of discomfort, and presence of specific symptoms (irritation, foreign body sensation, photophobia, redness, and pain). In the patched group, cumulative incidences of healing were 51%, 78%, and 92% after 1, 2, and 3 days, respectively, compared with 60%, 83%, and 88% in the nonpatched group. In the patched group, symptoms of initial discomfort decreased by 4.8, 4.1, and 5.5 cm after 1, 2, and 3 days, respectively, compared with 3.3, 5.1, and 6.5 cm in the nonpatched group.

CONCLUSION

Eye patching does not appear to be beneficial in the treatment of traumatic corneal abrasions compared with topical antibiotic ointment.

Twenty-five years of contact lenses: the impact on the cornea and ophthalmic practice

PURPOSE

The history of contact lenses has occurred in the latter half of the 20th century. In particular, events in the 1970s through the 1980s related to the invention of soft, hydrogel contact lenses have revolutionized the contact lens industry and the eye care attached to it. This article recounts that history from the perspective of market forces, inventions, and discoveries about the physiologic functioning of the cornea.

METHODS

The relevant literature is critically reviewed.

RESULTS

Discoveries about the oxygen needs of the cornea and consumer pressure for clear, comfortable, around-the-clock vision have resulted in a history of rigid gas permeable and soft lenses that leads to today's contact lens picture. The short-term and long-term effects of chronic hypoxia and the levels of lens oxygen transmissibility necessary to avoid them have been well-described. The advent of the soft lens, followed by the "human experiment" with initial extended-wear modalities, led to the advent of the disposable soft contact lens.

CONCLUSIONS

In the past 25 years, the development and wide acceptance of soft contact lenses have revolutionized the management of refractive error and corneal diseases.

A comparison of the effect of hyaluronic acid versus gentamicin on corneal epithelial healing

PURPOSE

An animal model study was conducted to compare the efficacy of recurrent topical applications of hyaluronic acid and gentamicin ointment for the treatment of noninfected, mechanical corneal erosions.

METHODS

An artificial, controlled wound of identical size and depth was inflicted to the corneas of three groups of rabbit eyes in order to measure their healing rates. One group was treated with hyaluronic acid (10 eyes) while the second group received gentamicin ointment (10 eyes). The third group remained untreated and served as the control (10 eyes). The rate of re-epithelisation was measured at 8-h intervals until complete re-epithelisation was observed. After complete wound closure, the rabbits were killed, and comparative histological examinations were performed.

RESULTS

Rabbit eyes treated with hyaluronic acid showed a significantly enhanced rate of epithelial defect closure compared with untreated eyes and a similar rate to that achieved with gentamicin ointment. In the eyes treated with hyaluronic acid a normal, multilayered epithelium was observed 48 h after complete healing, whereas the gentamicin-treated eyes showed an imperfectly layered epithelium, with irregularity of the cuboidal cells.

CONCLUSION

While both hyaluronic acid and gentamicin enhance corneal epithelial healing at comparable rates, our study suggests that hyaluronic acid may have a more favourable effect on the structure of the healing epithelium, and can offer an alternative mode of therapy for non-infectious corneal erosions.

Is eye padding routinely necessary after uncomplicated phacoemulsification?

PURPOSE

To investigate the value of eye padding following uncomplicated phacoemulsification under peribulbar anaesthesia.

METHODS

A prospective randomised controlled study was conducted to compare the effect of a conventional eye pad and shield with that of a clear eye shield applied without a pad in 83 patients undergoing routine phacoemulsification under peribulbar anaesthesia without lid block. The primary outcome measures were corneal fluorescein staining, discomfort, diplopia and mobility.

RESULTS

Moderate or severe corneal fluorescein staining on the first post-operative day was significantly more common in the pad and shield group (39%) than in the clear shield group (19%) (p < 0.01). There was no significant difference in post-operative pain as measured either by visual analogue scale or by categorical pain scale. Forty per cent of the clear shield group reported transient post-operative diplopia during the immediate post-operative period compared with 7% of the pad and shield group (p < 0.001). There was no significant difference in reported mobility between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Following phacoemulsification under peribulbar anaesthesia, the use of a gauze eye pad is associated with greater corneal fluorescein staining than a clear plastic shield without pad and offers no reduction in discomfort. A clear shield protects the globe against direct trauma, is associated with reduced moderate to severe corneal staining and facilitates vision in the early post-operative period. Transient diplopia reported by some patients given a clear shield is not disabling and would not be expected to occur in patients with one seeing eye. The use of a clear shield alone is a safe alternative to eye padding and offers important advantages in patients with one seeing eye.

National survey of corneal abrasion treatment

PURPOSE

To survey the different methods used in the management of corneal abrasions (including iatrongenic cases) nationally.

METHOD

A questionnaire survey of all 162 ophthalmic units in the UK was carried out in 1997.

RESULTS

The response rate was 134 of 162 (83%). The majority of units do not have an established policy for the treatment of corneal abrasions. Topical antibiotic alone and antibiotic together with a cycloplegic are the commonest immediate treatments, whilst the most common treatment course is topical antibiotic. Padding and patient follow-up is practised some of the time by most units and all of the time by the remaining minority. Use of a soft bandage contact lens is uncommon. There is no statistically significant difference (p > 0.05) between the policy-holders and non-policy-holders in their use of the various topical regimes, padding and soft bandage contact lens.

CONCLUSION

The traditional trio of topical antibiotic, cycloplegic and padding is still the mainstay of corneal abrasion treatment amongst units nation-wide. However, there is a lack of reproducible scientific evidence to support this treatment. Larger randomised trials looking at the efficacy of the different treatment options are needed.