Trends in prevalence of blindness and distance and near vision impairment over 30 years: an analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study

Background: To contribute to the WHO initiative, VISION 2020: The Right to Sight, an assessment of global vision impairment in 2020 and temporal change is needed. We aimed to extensively update estimates of global vision loss burden, presenting estimates for 2020, temporal change over three decades between 1990–2020, and forecasts for 2050. Methods: We did a systematic review and meta-analysis of population-based surveys of eye disease from January, 1980, to October, 2018. Only studies with samples representative of the population and with clearly defined visual acuity testing protocols were included. We fitted hierarchical models to estimate 2020 prevalence (with 95% uncertainty intervals [UIs]) of mild vision impairment (presenting visual acuity ≥6/18 and <6/12), moderate and severe vision impairment (<6/18 to 3/60), and blindness (<3/60 or less than 10° visual field around central fixation); and vision impairment from uncorrected presbyopia (presenting near vision <N6 or <N8 at 40 cm where best-corrected distance visual acuity is ≥6/12). We forecast estimates of vision loss up to 2050. Findings: In 2020, an estimated 43·3 million (95% UI 37·6–48·4) people were blind, of whom 23·9 million (55%; 20·8–26·8) were estimated to be female. We estimated 295 million (267–325) people to have moderate and severe vision impairment, of whom 163 million (55%; 147–179) were female; 258 million (233–285) to have mild vision impairment, of whom 142 million (55%; 128–157) were female; and 510 million (371–667) to have visual impairment from uncorrected presbyopia, of whom 280 million (55%; 205–365) were female. Globally, between 1990 and 2020, among adults aged 50 years or older, age-standardised prevalence of blindness decreased by 28·5% (–29·4 to −27·7) and prevalence of mild vision impairment decreased slightly (–0·3%, −0·8 to −0·2), whereas prevalence of moderate and severe vision impairment increased slightly (2·5%, 1·9 to 3·2; insufficient data were available to calculate this statistic for vision impairment from uncorrected presbyopia). In this period, the number of people who were blind increased by 50·6% (47·8 to 53·4) and the number with moderate and severe vision impairment increased by 91·7% (87·6 to 95·8). By 2050, we predict 61·0 million (52·9 to 69·3) people will be blind, 474 million (428 to 518) will have moderate and severe vision impairment, 360 million (322 to 400) will have mild vision impairment, and 866 million (629 to 1150) will have uncorrected presbyopia. Interpretation: Age-adjusted prevalence of blindness has reduced over the past three decades, yet due to population growth, progress is not keeping pace with needs. We face enormous challenges in avoiding vision impairment as the global population grows and ages

Causes of blindness and vision impairment in 2020 and trends over 30 years, and prevalence of avoidable blindness in relation to VISION 2020: the Right to Sight: an analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study

Background: Many causes of vision impairment can be prevented or treated. With an ageing global population, the demands for eye health services are increasing. We estimated the prevalence and relative contribution of avoidable causes of blindness and vision impairment globally from 1990 to 2020. We aimed to compare the results with the World Health Assembly Global Action Plan (WHA GAP) target of a 25% global reduction from 2010 to 2019 in avoidable vision impairment, defined as cataract and undercorrected refractive error. Methods: We did a systematic review and meta-analysis of population-based surveys of eye disease from January, 1980, to October, 2018. We fitted hierarchical models to estimate prevalence (with 95% uncertainty intervals [UIs]) of moderate and severe vision impairment (MSVI; presenting visual acuity from <6/18 to 3/60) and blindness (<3/60 or less than 10° visual field around central fixation) by cause, age, region, and year. Because of data sparsity at younger ages, our analysis focused on adults aged 50 years and older. Findings: Global crude prevalence of avoidable vision impairment and blindness in adults aged 50 years and older did not change between 2010 and 2019 (percentage change −0·2% [95% UI −1·5 to 1·0]; 2019 prevalence 9·58 cases per 1000 people [95% IU 8·51 to 10·8], 2010 prevalence 96·0 cases per 1000 people [86·0 to 107·0]). Age-standardised prevalence of avoidable blindness decreased by −15·4% [–16·8 to −14·3], while avoidable MSVI showed no change (0·5% [–0·8 to 1·6]). However, the number of cases increased for both avoidable blindness (10·8% [8·9 to 12·4]) and MSVI (31·5% [30·0 to 33·1]). The leading global causes of blindness in those aged 50 years and older in 2020 were cataract (15·2 million cases [9% IU 12·7–18·0]), followed by glaucoma (3·6 million cases [2·8–4·4]), undercorrected refractive error (2·3 million cases [1·8–2·8]), age-related macular degeneration (1·8 million cases [1·3–2·4]), and diabetic retinopathy (0·86 million cases [0·59–1·23]). Leading causes of MSVI were undercorrected refractive error (86·1 million cases [74·2–101·0]) and cataract (78·8 million cases [67·2–91·4]). Interpretation: Results suggest eye care services contributed to the observed reduction of age-standardised rates of avoidable blindness but not of MSVI, and that the target in an ageing global population was not reached. Funding: Brien Holden Vision Institute, Fondation Théa, The Fred Hollows Foundation, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Lions Clubs International Foundation, Sightsavers International, and University of Heidelberg

Pattern of injury and injury severity regarding bicycle accidents in Greater Goettingen

Hintergrund. Verletzungen und Risiken des gesamten Fahrradverkehrs sind bisher nur unzureichend untersucht. Ziel war es potentielle Gefährdungen zu ermitteln, um Präventionsstrategien entwickeln zu können.Patienten und Methode. Im Zeitraum von 07/2007 bis 06/2008 wurden Fahrradunfälle im Raum Göttingen anhand der Notfallaufnahmebögen retrospektiv ermittelt. Nach Auswertung der Krankenakten wurden die Patienten mittels standardisiertem Fragebogen befragt.Ergebnisse. 717 Patienten wurden ermittelt, 60% männlich und 40% weiblich. 67% der Verletzungen waren Bagatellverletzungen. Verletzungen am Kopf waren mit 37% die häufigste Lokalisation. Die schwerwiegendsten Verletzungen waren zerebrale Blutungen und Hämatome (1,3%). 91% waren Leichtverletzte und die mittlere Verletzungsschwere lag bei ISS=3,47. 74% der Patienten wurden ambulant behandelt. Risikofaktoren für schwere Verletzungen waren Alter über 35 Jahre, Unfälle mit motorisierten Verkehrsteilnehmern und Wegeunfälle. Fahrradhelme ließen Kopfverletzungen signifikant sinken und verhinderten schwere Kopfverletzungen. Einen Helm trugen 25% der Fahrradfahrer.Schlussfolgerung. Die Verletzungsschwere ist als niedrig einzustufen. Trotzdem muss die Verkehrssicherheit und Verkehrserziehung weiter verbessert werden. Eine staatliche Helmpflicht ist zu empfehlen

Shareconomy in der Fertigungsindustrie: Auswirkungen auf die Fertigungsindustrie durch das Paradigma des Teilens

The trend towards a sharing economy can be seen in a lot of domains. This trend is also visible in the domain of manufacturing. Production ressources are made available as a service via cloud manufacturing platforms. Assuming that this trend will continue, a huge pool of production ressources will be available in the future for the end customer. In the following article the impact of this development will be discussed by looking at three scenarios

Can low-profile double-plate osteosynthesis for olecranon fractures reduce implant removal? A retrospective multicenter study

Background: Because of poor soft-tissue coverage at the proximal ulna and prominent posteriorly positioned implants, hardware removal remains the most common reason for revision surgery of olecranon fractures that were operatively treated using plate osteosynthesis. We hypothesized that low-profile double-plate osteosynthesis would reduce the number of soft tissue-related hardware removals compared with single posterior plating whereas the functional results would be comparable. Methods: This study retrospectively included patients who were treated with low-profile double-plate osteosynthesis or a posterior 2.7-/3.5-mm locking compression plate (LCP) for isolated olecranon fractures from 3 study centers. In addition to the implant removal rate, functional outcome measures (range of motion; Mayo Elbow Performance Score; Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand score) were statistically compared. Results: The study included 79 patients, with a mean follow-up period of 36 months (range. 24-77 months). Of these patients, 37 were treated with low-prolile double-plate osteosynthesis and 42, with a 2.7-/3.5-mm LCP. The mean age was 57 years (range, 18-93 years). Range of motion after treatment with low-profile double-plate osteosynthesis and a 2.7-/3.5-mm LCP measured 129 degrees (range, 80 degrees-155 degrees) and 139 degrees (range, 100 degrees-155 degrees), respectively. The Mayo Elbow Performance Scores were 95 (range, 65-100) and 99 (range, 85-100), respectively (P = .028), and the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand scores were 5.0 (range, 0-49) and 4.6 (range, 0-28), respectively (P = .67 3) . Hardware was removed in 32% and 50% of patients after treatment with double-plate osteosynthesis and a 2.7-/3.5mm LCP. respectively (P = .11). Hardware removal owing to soft-tissue irritation was noted in 27% of patients after double-plate osteosynthesis and 38% after LCP treatment (P = .30). Discussion: Low-profile double-plate osteosynthesis for treating olecranon fractures resulted in good clinical outcomes. However, the rate of hardware removal was not significantly reduced, and the functional results were comparable to those of common single posterior plate osteosynthesis. (C) 2020 Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery Board of Trustees. All rights reserved

Injury patterns following simple elbow dislocation: radiological analysis implies existence of a pure valgus dislocation mechanism

Introduction!#!The aim of the present study was to analyze the injury pattern and thus the dislocation mechanism after simple elbow dislocation using radiographs and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) data sets.!##!Materials and methods!#!The MRI data sets of 64 patients with a mean age of 44 years (18-77 years) were analyzed retrospectively. The inclusion criteria for the study were (1) radiograph with confirmed simple elbow dislocation, (2) low-energy trauma, (3) MRI of the affected elbow ≤ 3 weeks after trauma. The dislocation direction was determined using radiographs. The integrity of the lateral collateral ligament complex (LCLC), common extensor origin (CEO), anterior capsule (AC), medial collateral ligament (MCL), and common flexor origin (CFO) as well as the joint congruity were assessed based on MRI.!##!Results!#!34 patients (53%) had a posterolateral, 26 patients (41%) a posterior, and 4 patients (6%) a posteromedial dislocation. LCLC and AC were affected in 64 out of 64 patients (100%). MCL was affected in 58 patients (91%). CEO were affected in 25 patients (39%) and the CFO in 20 patients (31%). In 11 patients (17%) the injury pattern was more pronounced medially than laterally (MCL, CFO, LCLC), with 2 of these patients exhibiting only a partial LCLC tear. All cases with joint incongruency (n = 12, 19%) showed CEO and/or CFO involvement.!##!Conclusions!#!Simple elbow dislocation leads to a very heterogeneous spectrum of soft tissue injury pattern. A small proportion of patients showed medially pronounced injury patterns. These findings strongly indicate existence of a 'reversed Horii circle' with an underlying valgus mechanism (medial force induction) originating and continuing from medial to anterior

Outcomes and revision rates of primary vs. secondary reverse total shoulder arthroplasty for proximal humeral fractures

&lt;jats:title&gt;Abstract&lt;/jats:title&gt;&lt;jats:sec&gt; &lt;jats:title&gt;Background&lt;/jats:title&gt; &lt;jats:p&gt;Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) is a standard treatment for proximal humeral fractures (PHF) and its sequelae. In this study we analyzed the clinical outcomes of primary vs. secondary RSA for displaced PHF in elderly patients.&lt;/jats:p&gt; &lt;/jats:sec&gt;&lt;jats:sec&gt; &lt;jats:title&gt;Methods&lt;/jats:title&gt; &lt;jats:p&gt;We retrospectively reviewed 68 cases of primary or secondary RSA for displaced PHF. For 51 patients (28 primary RSA, 23 secondary RSA), a minimum 12-month follow-up with clinical and radiological assessment was available. Clinical assessment comprised joint active range of motion, DASH, Constant–Murley Score (CMS), Subjective Shoulder Value, and Visual Analog Scale for pain. Outcomes and complications of patients with primary RSA were compared with those of patients with secondary RSA.&lt;/jats:p&gt; &lt;/jats:sec&gt;&lt;jats:sec&gt; &lt;jats:title&gt;Results&lt;/jats:title&gt; &lt;jats:p&gt;Follow-up data were available for 45 women and six men with a mean age of 73 years (range, 59–87) at the time of implantation. In 28 cases, primary RSA was performed; in 23 cases, RSA was performed as a revision procedure for fracture sequelae after failed plating, nailing, or hemiarthroplasty. The mean age- and gender-related CMS was 82.2 ± 34.2% (raw mean CMS: 46.8 ± 19.6 points). Among nine of the 51 patients with follow-up data (17.6%), ten complications occurred with six surgical revisions. Primary RSA (&lt;jats:italic&gt;n&lt;/jats:italic&gt; = 28) resulted in better clinical shoulder function compared with secondary RSA (&lt;jats:italic&gt;n&lt;/jats:italic&gt; = 23). Significantly more complications and revision surgeries were observed following secondary than primary RSA (&lt;jats:italic&gt;p&lt;/jats:italic&gt; = 0.013).&lt;/jats:p&gt; &lt;/jats:sec&gt;&lt;jats:sec&gt; &lt;jats:title&gt;Conclusion&lt;/jats:title&gt; &lt;jats:p&gt;In this study, primary RSA for displaced PHF in the elderly was associated with better clinical function and lower complication and revision rates than secondary RSA. Predictive parameters for failure of humeral head-preserving fracture fixation and anatomic hemiarthroplasty should be carefully evaluated. Primary RSA should be considered when surgical treatment of PHF is indicated in elderly patients.&lt;/jats:p&gt; &lt;/jats:sec&gt