Effect of "Pink Eye" Label on Parents' Intent to Use Antibiotics and Perceived Contagiousness.

Parents of children who presented for a pediatrics appointment responded to a clinical vignette that described a child with symptoms consistent with acute viral conjunctivitis. In a 2 × 2 randomized survey design, the physician in the vignette either used the term "pink eye" or "eye infection" to describe the symptoms, and either told parents that antibiotics are likely ineffective at treating the symptoms or did not discuss effectiveness. When the symptoms were referred to as "pink eye," parents remained interested in antibiotics, despite being informed about their ineffectiveness. By contrast, when the symptoms were referred to as an "eye infection," information about antibiotic ineffectiveness significantly reduced interest, Mdiff = 1.63, P < .001. Parents who received the "pink eye" label also thought that the symptoms were more contagious and were less likely to believe that their child could go to child care, compared with parents who received the "eye infection" label, Mdiff = 0.37, P = .38.

Branch retinal artery occlusion following radiation therapy to the head and neck: a case report.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have established that radiation to the head and neck leads to atherosclerosis and stenosis of the carotid artery and subsequent increased stroke risk, but the ophthalmic sequella following cervical irradiation is less well-defined. CASE PRESENTATION: We present a single case of branch retinal artery occlusion (BRAO) in a 55 year-old Caucasian male seen at the University of Michigan in 2008 following unilateral head and neck radiation. CONCLUSION: This case demonstrates that patients receiving radiation to the head and neck may be at increased risk for developing a BRAO secondary to atherosclerotic changes of vessels adjacent to the radiation target. Given this risk, it may be reasonable to obtain carotid artery imaging in patients with a history of cervical radiation who present with sudden or transient visual field defects, even in the absence of other conventional risk factors for atherosclerosis.

The effects of systemic α1-adrenoreceptor antagonists on pupil diameter.

AIM: To assess differences in pupil diameter between men taking systemic α(1)-adrenoreceptor antagonists and controls. SETTING: University of Michigan clinics, USA. METHODS: Male patients over the age of 50 years were recruited from clinics over 3 months and divided into two groups: 18 study patients taking α(1)-adrenoreceptor antagonists (Flomax, Uroxatral, Cardura and Hytrin) and 31 control patients who had never been on them. Those with conditions known to affect pupil diameter were excluded. Pre-dilation pupil diameters were recorded using a pupillometer in mesopic and scotopic conditions. Right eyes were dilated with phenylephrine and tropicamide, and the left eye served as an undilated control. Following dilation, pupil diameters were measured in both lighting conditions. RESULTS: No statistically significant difference was found in pupil mydriasis of patients taking α(1)-antagonists versus controls (mesopic p=0.37, scotopic p=0.67). When considering only those patients taking tamsulosin, the lack of significance remained. The duration of time on the medication did not have a statistically significant effect on pupil mydriasis. Comparison of pupil diameters of patients on tamsulosin with those on non-selective α(1)-antagonists, both before and after dilation, showed no significant difference in pupil mydriasis (mesopic p=0.77, scotopic p=1.00). CONCLUSIONS: The outcomes of this study present an interesting contrast to current literature. Previously, it had been hypothesised that a majority of patients taking α(1)-antagonists would experience preoperative impairment of pupil dilation. The authors found no significant decrease in pupil diameters of patients on α(1)-adrenoreceptor antagonists compared with controls, and no indication that duration or medication subtype had an effect.