Practice pattern of cataract surgeons when operating on seropositive patients

• Main Authors: Parveen Rewri, Madhavi Sharma, Aprajita Lohan, Deepika Singh, Vibha Yadav, Aparna Singhal
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications 2019-01-01
• Series: Indian Journal of Ophthalmology
• Subjects: Blood-borne viral infections; cataract; practice pattern
• Online Access: http://www.ijo.in/article.asp?issn=0301-4738;year=2019;volume=67;issue=3;spage=335;epage=339;aulast=Rewri

Purpose: The aim of this study is to know practice pattern of cataract surgeons when operating on patients, positive for blood-borne viral infections (BBVIs), namely, hepatitis B virus, hepatitis C virus, and human immunodeficiency virus. We also studied their awareness, knowledge, and attitude toward universal precautions and guidelines. Methods: The telephonic survey enrolled practicing cataract surgeons, who were interviewed to record responses pertaining to their practice using an open-ended questionnaire. We studied statistical significance of difference of frequency of prick injuries in topical versus peribulbar anesthesia, and phacoemulsification versus manual small incision cataract surgery by employing Chi-square test. Significance of proportion was calculated using z-test. For all statistical calculations, significance level was set at 0.05%. Results: Of 623 ophthalmologists contacted, responses of 479 (79%) ophthalmologists were analyzed. Maximum participants were in private practice (48%). During whole practicing carrier, 313 (65%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 61–70) participants admitted having suffered injury with needle or sharp instruments; of these, 204 (65%; 95% CI: 60–70) participants did not report their injury. Wearing “double gloves” during cataract surgery was the most common barrier adopted by participants. Conclusion: We found high prevalence of occupational-related sharp injuries among ophthalmologists in this survey. Majority of them were aware of universal precautions, but adherence to postexposure prophylaxis was lacking.