Allergic Conjunctivitis Management: Update on Ophthalmic Solutions.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The aim of this review, is to present an updated revision of topical management of SAC and PAC, based on the available scientific evidence and focused on the impact of ophthalmic solution formulations on eye surface. RECENT FINDINGS: Physicians treating ocular allergy should be aware of tear film and tear film disruption in SAC and PAC, and how eye drop composition and additives affect the physiology of the allergic eye. Seasonal and perennial allergic conjunctivitis (SAC and PAC) are the most frequent causes of ocular allergy (OA), and both conditions are underdiagnosed and undertreated. SAC and PAC are immunoglobulin E (IgE)-mediated hypersensitivity reactions. The additional tear film disruption caused by the release of inflammatory mediators increases and exacerbates the impact of signs and symptoms and may trigger damage of the ocular surface. Comorbidities are frequent, and dry eye disease in particular must be considered. Clinical guidelines for the management of SAC and PAC recommend topical therapy with antihistamines, mast cells stabilizers or dualaction agents as first-line treatment, but care should be taken, as many medications contain other compounds that may contribute to ocular surface damage.

Ocular chemical burns in the workplace: Epidemiological characteristics.

BACKGROUND: Epidemiological studies focusing on occupational pathologies can be an important medium through which to bring about change with respect to workplace accidents, both in terms of prevention planning and management as well as the appropriate care following an accident. Ocular chemical burns benefit from urgent attention as, if not treated early and appropriately, the tissue of the eye and its functionality can be seriously compromised. The objective of this study was to collate epidemiological data on workplace ocular chemical burns which could in turn serve to identify key action points in terms of occupational health. METHODS: Cohort study with 604 cases of chemical burns to the eye occurring in the workplace between 2014 and 2015. Criteria inclusion were diagnosis of chemical burn, patient seen at the medical centre of the mutual society, workplace acquired ophthalmic pathology leading to the issuing of a sickness certificate. No exclusion criteria were defined. RESULTS: Ocular chemical burns were the second most common workplace eye injury (12.68%) behind foreign bodies in the eye (43.42%). Men accounted for 68.54% of cases of ocular chemical burns. In around 75% of cases, sickness certification was for less than 7 days, although 6 patients suffered permanent disability. The occupational sector which was most affected particularly the industry service industry. The economic costs with these workplace injuries were extracted. CONCLUSIONS: Appropriate early medical assistance is essential. The production and distribution of clinical guides for health care workers could optimise first line assistance and mitigate possible training deficiencies.