Current status of emergency treatment of chemical eye burns in workplaces

Chemical eye burns present an avoidable, but frequent, occupational injury with potentially detrimental consequences for the quality of life and occupational rehabilitation of the injured. A periodical review of guidelines is required to assure the optimal emergency management. We reviewed the liter...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inInternational journal of ophthalmology Vol. 14; no. 2; pp. 306 - 309
Main Authors Claassen, Kevin, Rodil Dos Anjos, Dominique, Broding, Horst Christoph
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published China International Journal of Ophthalmology Press 18.02.2021
Press of International Journal of Ophthalmology (IJO PRESS)
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:Chemical eye burns present an avoidable, but frequent, occupational injury with potentially detrimental consequences for the quality of life and occupational rehabilitation of the injured. A periodical review of guidelines is required to assure the optimal emergency management. We reviewed the literature with emphasis on current German guidelines, primarily MEDLINE. If the crucial first-line measure, the injury prevention has failed and an eye burn has been sustained, the immediate and copious rinsing of the eye is the pivotal emergency treatment modality. Whereas the immediacy and sufficiency of the emergency rinsing are largely unanimous, there is an ongoing debate about the benefits and risks of specific rinsing solutions, and regular updates on guidelines and recommendations for the emergency treatment are warranted. The easiest and readily available rinsing solution is tap water, which fulfils the crucial criteria conveniently in most industrialized countries: purity, sterility, and neutral pH. Other rinsing solutions are proposing higher osmolality to stabilize the physiological pH, because of their superior buffering capacity. However, there is no compelling evidence for a substantial benefit, and some reports suggest that there could be unwanted side effects. In combination with the substantially increased expenditure and a more complex handling procedure, currently a general recommendation of any other solution than tap water is not warranted.
ISSN:2222-3959
2227-4898
DOI:10.18240/IJO.2021.02.19