Dataset Information

Trends in US Emergency Department Visits for Pediatric Acute Ocular Injury.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

There is a lack of literature describing the incidence of pediatric acute ocular injury and associated likelihood of vision loss in the United States. Understanding national pediatric eye injury trends may inform future efforts to prevent ocular trauma.

Objective

To characterize pediatric acute ocular injury in the United States using data from a stratified, national sample of emergency department (ED) visits.

Design, setting, and participants

A retrospective cohort study was conducted. Study participants received care at EDs included in the 2006 to 2014 Nationwide Emergency Department Sample, comprising 376 040 children aged 0 to 17 years with acute traumatic ocular injuries. Data were analyzed from June 2016 to March 2018.

Exposures

International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification diagnosis codes and external-cause-of-injury codes identified children with acute ocular injuries.

Main outcomes and measures

Demographic and clinical characteristics of children with acute traumatic ocular injuries were collected and temporal trends in the incidence of ocular injuries by age, risk of vision loss, and mechanism of injury were explored.

Results

In 2014, there were an estimated 163 431 (95% CI, 151 235-175 627) ED visits for pediatric acute ocular injury. Injured children were more often male (63.0%; 95% CI, 62.5-63.5) and in the youngest age category (birth to 4 years, 35.3%; 95% CI, 34.4-36.2; vs 10-14 years, 20.6%; 95% CI, 20.1-21.1). Injuries commonly resulted from a strike to the eye (22.5%; 95% CI, 21.3-23.8) and affected the adnexa (43.7%; 95% CI, 42.7-44.8). Most injuries had a low risk for vision loss (84.2%; 95% CI, 83.5-85.0), with only 1.3% (95% CI, 1.1-1.5) of injuries being high risk. Between 2006 and 2014, pediatric acute ocular injuries decreased by 26.1% (95% CI, -27.0 to -25.0). This decline existed across all patient demographic characteristics, injury patterns, and vision loss categories and for most mechanisms of injury. There were increases during the study in injuries related to sports (12.8%; 95% CI, 5.4-20.2) and household/domestic activities (20.7%; 95% CI, 16.2-25.2). The greatest decrease in high-risk injuries occurred with motor vehicle crashes (-79.8%; 95% CI, -85.8 to -74.9) and guns (-68.5%; 95% CI, -73.5 to -63.6).

Conclusions and relevance

This study demonstrated a decline in pediatric acute ocular injuries in the United States between 2006 and 2014. However, pediatric acute ocular injuries continue to be prevalent, and understanding these trends can help establish future prevention strategies.

SUBMITTER: Matsa E

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6142941 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundCanadian pediatric emergency department visits are increasing, with a disproportionate increase in low-acuity visits locally (33% of volume in 2008-09, 41% in 2011-12). We sought to understand: 1) presentation patterns and resource implications; 2) parents' perceptions and motivations; and 3) alternate health care options considered prior to presenting with low-acuity problems.MethodsWe conducted a prospective cohort study at our tertiary pediatric emergency department serving two provinces to explore differences between patients with and without a primary care provider. During four, 2-week study periods over 1 year, parents of low-acuity visits received an anonymous survey. Presentation times, interventions, diagnoses and dispositions were captured on a data collection form linked to the survey by study number.ResultsParents completed 2,443 surveys (74.1% response rate), with survey-data collection form pairs available for 2,146 visits. Overall, 89.7% of respondents had a primary care provider; 68% were family physicians. Surprisingly, 40% of visits occurred during weekday office hours and 27.3% occurred within 4 hours of symptom onset; 67.5% of those early presenters were for injuries. Few parents sought care from their primary care provider (25%), health information line (20.7%), or urgent care clinic (18.5%); 36% reported that they believed their child's problem required the emergency department. Forty-five percent required only a history, physical exam and reassurance; only 11% required an intervention not available in an office setting. Patients without a primary care provider were significantly more likely to present during weekday office hours (p = 0.003), have longer symptom duration (p<0.001), and not know of other options (p = 0.001).ConclusionsMany parents seek pediatric emergency department care for low-acuity problems despite their child having a primary care provider. Ensuring timely access to these providers may help reduce pediatric emergency department overuse. Educational initiatives should inform parents about low-acuity problems and where appropriate care can/should be accessed.

Project description:PurposeTo determine the frequency of emergency department (ED) visits for nonurgent and urgent ocular conditions and risk factors associated with ED use for nonurgent and urgent ocular problems.DesignRetrospective, longitudinal cohort analysis.ParticipantsAll enrollees aged 21 years or older in a United States managed care network during 2001-2014.MethodsWe identified all enrollees visiting an ED for ocular conditions identified by International Classification of Diseases, billing codes. Diagnosis is well-described as urgent, nonurgent, or other. We assessed the frequency of ED visits for urgent and nonurgent ocular conditions and how they changed over time. Next, we performed multivariable Cox regression modeling to determine factors associated with visiting an ED for urgent or nonurgent ocular conditions.Main outcome measuresHazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of visiting an ED for urgent or nonurgent ocular conditions.ResultsOf the 11 160 833 enrollees eligible for this study, 376 680 (3.4%) had 1 or more ED visit for an eye-related problem over a mean ± standard deviation of 5.4±3.3 years' follow-up. Among these enrolled, 86 473 (23.0%) had 1 or more ED visits with a nonurgent ocular condition and 25 289 (6.7%) had at least 1 ED visit with an urgent ocular condition. Use of the ED for nonurgent ocular problems was associated with younger age (P < 0.0001 for all comparisons), black race or Latino ethnicity (P < 0.0001 for both), male sex (P < 0.0001), lower income (P < 0.0001 for all comparisons), and those who frequently sought treatment at an ED for nonophthalmologic medical problems in a given year (P < 0.0001). Enrollees with established eye care professionals had a 10% reduced hazard of visiting the ED for nonurgent ocular conditions (adjusted HR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.88-0.92; P < 0.0001).ConclusionsNearly one-quarter of enrollees who visited the ED for an ocular problem received a diagnosis of a nonurgent condition. Better educating and incentivizing patients to seek care for nonurgent ocular diseases in an office-based setting could yield considerable cost savings without adversely affecting health outcomes and could allow EDs to better serve patients with more severe conditions.