Rasch-Validated Italian Scale for Diagnosing Digital Eye Strain: The Computer Vision Syndrome Questionnaire IT©.

The use of digital devices affects eye health; this can influence the performance of workers. To assess this impact, validated patient-reported outcome questionnaires are needed. The purpose of this study was to validate the psychometric properties of the Italian version of the Computer Vision Syndrome Questionnaire (CVS-Q©) using Rasch analysis. Two hundred and forty-one Italian workers completed an ad hoc questionnaire on anamnesis and exposure to digital devices, and the Italian version of the CVS-Q©. Subsequently, a battery involving three clinical ocular surface and tear tests was performed. The reliability and validity of the scale was assessed using the Andrich Rating Scale Model, and the prevalence of computer vision syndrome (CVS) was calculated. A good fit of both items and persons to the predictions of the Rasch model was observed, with acceptable reliability, unidimensionality, and no or minimal severe differences as a function of gender or age; moreover, good test-retest repeatability, adequate values of sensitivity, reliability, and area under the curve, and adequate construct validity based on clinical tests were obtained. Workers with a questionnaire score ≥ 7 were found to present with CVS. The prevalence of CVS was 76.6%. The CVS-Q IT© is a valid and reliable scale to assess CVS in Italian workers who use digital devices.

Influence of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Admissions for Retinal Detachment in a Tertiary Eye Emergency Department.

PURPOSE: To compare the incidence and clinical characteristics of retinal detachments (RDs) diagnosed in a tertiary eye emergency department (EED) during the COVID-19 pandemic and in the corresponding period of the previous 4 years. METHODS: EED consultations performed from February 21, 2020 (first national case of COVID-19 infection) to May 3, 2020 (end of lockdown imposed by national Government) and for the same date range of 2016-2019 (pre-COVID-19 period), and with a confirmed diagnosis of RD were collected and reviewed. The following demographical and clinical features have been analyzed: age, gender, etiology of RD, macular involvement, best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), and duration of experienced symptoms. RESULTS: Eighty-two subjects (20.5±1.0 eyes/year) were diagnosed with RD in the pre-COVID-19 period, compared to 12 patients in the COVID-19 period (-41.5%). During the pandemic, patients complained symptoms for a median of 8.5 days (IQR, 1.7-15 days) before the EED consultation, while in the pre-COVID-19 period, they declared they had been symptomatic for 2 days (IQR, 1-4 days) (p=0.037); macula-off RD raised from 56% to 75% and no one reported trauma as a triggering event. CONCLUSION: During the COVID-19 pandemic, the rate of RD diagnosed in our EED decreased significantly and patients waited longer before asking for an ophthalmologic examination. These findings are probably due to the fear of contracting the COVID-19 infection attending hospital environments. Even if emergency departments are often misused by people suffering non-urgent conditions, patients complaining of sudden visual loss, visual field defects, or phosphenes should always and promptly attend an EED visit to prevent a worse prognosis.

Impact of Covid-19 pandemic on Ophthalmic Emergency Department in an Italian tertiary eye centre.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on the Ophthalmic Emergency Department (OED) activity of the tertiary eye centre of Verona. METHODS: OED reports of patients visited during lockdown (COVID-period) and in the corresponding period of 2017, 2018 and 2019 (COVID-free period) have been retrieved to draw a comparison. Patients' demographic and clinical data recorded and analysed are the following: age, gender, previous ocular history, aetiology, symptoms onset, type of symptoms, discharge diagnosis, urgency and severity of diagnosis. RESULTS: OED consultations dropped from 20.6 ± 7.3 visits/day of the COVID-free period to 8.6 ± 4.6 visits/day of the COVID-period. In the COVID-period patients waited longer before physically going to the OED, lamented more vision loss and less redness and reported a higher percentage of traumatic events when compared to the COVID-free period. A significant reduction of ocular surface conditions occurred, while vitreo-retinal disorders increased. Overall, both urgency and severity of diagnosed diseases raised significantly in the COVID-period. CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 pandemic drove a significant reduction of the overall OED activity. People with less urgent and milder conditions preferred to wait and endure their ocular discomfort for a few days rather than leaving home and risking to contract the infection. Our analysis highlights how several times the OED is used improperly by patients diagnosed with non-urgent disorders. A more accurate use of the OED would allow a reduction of management costs and the avoidance of overcrowding, which can lead to delays in the care of patients that really need assistance.