Citation

Claassen K, Rodil Dos Anjos D, Broding HC. Int. J. Ophthalmol. 2021; 14(2): 306-309.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2021, Press of International Journal of Ophthalmology)

DOI

10.18240/ijo.2021.02.19

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

Chemical eye burns present an avoidable, but frequent, occupational injury with potentially detrimental consequences for the quality of life and occupational rehabilitation of the injured. A periodical review of guidelines is required to assure the optimal emergency management. We reviewed the literature with emphasis on current German guidelines, primarily MEDLINE. If the crucial first-line measure, the injury prevention has failed and an eye burn has been sustained, the immediate and copious rinsing of the eye is the pivotal emergency treatment modality. Whereas the immediacy and sufficiency of the emergency rinsing are largely unanimous, there is an ongoing debate about the benefits and risks of specific rinsing solutions, and regular updates on guidelines and recommendations for the emergency treatment are warranted. The easiest and readily available rinsing solution is tap water, which fulfils the crucial criteria conveniently in most industrialized countries: purity, sterility, and neutral pH. Other rinsing solutions are proposing higher osmolality to stabilize the physiological pH, because of their superior buffering capacity. However, there is no compelling evidence for a substantial benefit, and some reports suggest that there could be unwanted side effects. In combination with the substantially increased expenditure and a more complex handling procedure, currently a general recommendation of any other solution than tap water is not warranted.

Language: en

Keywords

emergency treatment; eye burns; occupational medicine; rinse solutions