Comparative analysis of use of porous orbital implant with mucus membrane graft and dermis fat graft as a primary procedure in reconstruction of severely contracted socket.

Purpose: The purpose of our study is to present a surgical technique of primary porous orbital ball implantation with overlying mucus membrane graft (MMG) for reconstruction of severely contracted socket and to evaluate prosthesis retention and motility in comparison to dermis fat graft (DFG). Study Design: Prospective comparative study. Materials and Methods: A total of 24 patients of severe socket contracture (Grade 2‑4 Krishna’s classification) were subdivided into two groups, 12 patients in each group. In Group I, DFG have been used for reconstruction. In Group II, porous polyethylene implant with MMG has been used as a primary procedure for socket reconstruction. In Group I DFG was carried out in usual procedure. In case of Group II, vascularized scar tissues were separated 360° and were fashioned into four strips. A scleral capped porous polyethylene implant was placed in the intraconal space and four strips of scar tissue were secured to the scleral cap and extended part overlapped the implant to make a twofold barrier between the implant and MMG. Patients were followed‑up as per prefixed proforma. Prosthesis motility and retention between the two groups were measured. Results: In Group I, four patients had recurrence of contracture with fall out of prosthesis. In Group II stable reconstruction was achieved in all the patients. In terms of prosthesis motility, maximum in Group I was 39.2% and Group II, was 59.3%. The difference in prosthesis retention (P = 0.001) and motility (P = 0.004) between the two groups was significant. Conclusion: Primary socket reconstruction with porous orbital implant and MMG for severe socket contracture is an effective method in terms of prosthesis motility and prosthesis retention.

Comparison on testability of visual acuity, stereo acuity and colour vision tests between children with learning disabilities and children without learning disabilities in government primary schools.

Context: Children with learning disabilities might have difficulties to communicate effectively and give reliable responses as required in various visual function testing procedures. Aims: The purpose of this study was to compare the testability of visual acuity using the modified Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) and Cambridge Crowding Cards, stereo acuity using Lang Stereo test II and Butterfly stereo tests and colour perception using Colour Vision Test Made Easy (CVTME) and Ishihara’s Test for Colour Deficiency (Ishihara Test) between children in mainstream classes and children with learning disabilities in special education classes in government primary schools. Materials and Methods: A total of 100 primary school children (50 children from mainstream classes and 50 children from special education classes) matched in age were recruited in this cross‑sectional comparative study. The testability was determined by the percentage of children who were able to give reliable respond as required by the respective tests. ‘Unable to test’ was defined as inappropriate response or uncooperative despite best efforts of the screener. Results: The testability of the modified ETDRS, Butterfly stereo test and Ishihara test for respective visual function tests were found lower among children in special education classes (P < 0.001) but not in Cambridge Crowding Cards, Lang Stereo test II and CVTME. Conclusion: Non verbal or “matching” approaches were found to be more superior in testing visual functions in children with learning disabilities. Modifications of vision testing procedures are essential for children with learning disabilities.