Why are there defaulters in eye health projects?

PURPOSE: To identify barriers to attendance for eye examination of schoolchildren. METHODS: Cross-sectional study. Students in grades 1-4 in elementary school in Guarulhos (Brazil) were screened and referred for ophthalmic examination in 2006. Facilities offered in this project were: examination arranged during weekends, free transportation, spectacle donation and two different opportunities for exam. A questionnaire was applied, by interview, to a sample consisted of students' parents attended in a community project who missed the first call and attended the recall, to identify the reasons for non-attendance. RESULTS: The sample consisted of 767 parents or guardians, corresponding to an equal number of schoolchildren. Personal characteristics of the students: 49.2% male and 50.8% female, 60.2% of them had never received previous ophthalmologic evaluation. Reported reasons for no-show to the project: parents had not received appropriate orientation (35.6%), loss of working day (20.6%), illness (12.4%), had another appointment (10.0%). The need for eyeglasses was higher in the recall. CONCLUSIONS: A significant number of parents did not take their children for ophthalmological exams, even when a second opportunity was offered in projects with transportation facilities, free exams performed during weekends and spectacle donation. The main causes of absenteeism were lack of awareness and work. For 87.1% of the absenteeism cases, the difficulties could be overcome via improved structuring of the first call. A recall increases attendance coverage of target population by only 15.2% (59.3 to 74.5%). Notably, the eye exam campaign was the first exam for most of the absent students

Investment and satisfaction in short-duration course: model of evaluation

OBJETIVO: Apresentar um modelo de avaliação da satisfação dos participantes de um curso de curta duração, considerando-se o custo financeiro e o conhecimento adquirido. MÉTODOS: Através da aplicação de questionários, foi realizado um estudo transversal em amostra prontamente acessível, formada por oftalmologistas (n=29) que presenciaram o "II Curso de Transferência de Habilidades em Adaptação de Lentes de Contato", no Hospital Sírio-Libanês (SP). RESULTADOS: A amostra foi composta por 29 indivíduos, 58,6% do sexo feminino e 37,9% do sexo masculino (uma pessoa não respondeu à questão). Dos participantes, 41,4% gastaram menos de 800 reais (U$400), 24,1$ 400,00); 24.1% have invested from 800 up to 1000 reais; and 34,5%, from 1200 up to 3000 reais. The acquisition of knowledge was considered "very satisfactory" in relation to 10 (76.92%) of the researched items; "average" in relation to other 3 (23.08%); and no item was considered insufficient. The course would be recommended to colleagues by 95% of the attendants. CONCLUSIONS: The model allowed the assessment of expectations and the acquisition of knowledge in each item of the program, the efficiency of each panel of the course, the costs for the students and thesatisfaction level of the attendants

Validity of recall absent schoolchildren to free eye health projects

Purpose: To analyze the results of recall absent schoolchildren to eye health projects. Methods: Cross-sectional study. Visual screening was performed in schoolchildren attending 1st to 4th grades at public schools, from 7 to 10 years-old, to select and forward to complete ophthalmic evaluation. The projects were performed during weekends, at a public school, in the same municipality. Free transportation, food and eyeglasses were offered. A second opportunity of examination was offered to the students who were absent from the first call, with the same facilities. Results: 51,509 schoolchildren had their vision tested, 14,651 (28.4%) were referred for ophthalmic examination. Of these, 8,683 (59.3%) attended the first call, 2,228 (37.3%) attended the recall and 25.5% of parents did not take their children to ophthalmic examination. The need for eyeglasses for children who attended the examination was 23.8% and 32.0% in the first opportunity and recall, respectively. The recall increased the coverage in 15.2% (59.3% to 74.5%). Conclusion: An expressive number of parents (25.5%) did not bring their children to be examined, even at a second opportunity of exam. The facilities offered: access, free examination, transportation and glasses. Children who were absent in the first opportunity and appeared at recall had a greater need for eyeglasses. Recall increased the coverage in 15.2% (59.3% to 74.5%) and it is not recommended when financial resources are limited

Optical correction issue in schoolchildren: access, attendance, need and use of spectacles

INTRODUÇÃO: A falta da correção óptica recentemente foi reconhecida como importante causa de baixa visão e parece ser um problema fácil de ser resolvido com o uso de óculos. No entanto, a falta da correção óptica é um problema complexo do seu diagnóstico ao tratamento, envolvendo a procura e alcance da assistência médica, além da confecção e uso dos óculos. OBJETIVOS: Determinar a frequência da necessidade de correção óptica em escolares; determinar a influência do absenteísmo no estudo da frequência da necessidade de correção óptica e suas causas; determinar o impacto da reconvocação dos faltosos na cobertura do atendimento oftalmológico; verificar cobertura oftalmológica prévia; verificar uso da correção óptica prescrita e causas de abandono de óculos. MÉTODO: Foi realizado um estudo transversal analítico. Escolares de 7 a 10 anos do ensino público de Guarulhos foram triados e encaminhados para exame oftalmológico na Campanha Olho no Olho 2006 e 2007. RESULTADOS: Foram triados 40.197 escolares e encaminhados 11.741 escolares com suspeita de problemas visuais. O absenteísmo na primeira convocação foi 42.5% e na reconvocação foi 62.2%. A Campanha alcançou 73.6% dos escolares encaminhados. A reconvocação ampliou a cobertura do projeto em 16.1%. A falta de orientação (não ter recebido aviso ou guia de encaminhamento) foi a razão mais frequente (35.6%) alegada para o não comparecimento, seguida de trabalho (20.6%) e doença (12.4%). A necessidade de óculos não foi fator associado ao comparecimento. Para 60.2% dos escolares foi a primeira oportunidade de exame ocular, sendo que 27.3% procuraram mas não tiveram acesso a consulta médica. Dos 1.379 escolares que já haviam feito exame, 48.3% utilizaram o SUS e 1.029 receberam prescrição de óculos em exame prévio. Destes, 899 (87.4%) fizeram os óculos e apenas 590 (57.3%) usavam os óculos no dia do exame. Dos óculos doados na Campanha, 84.7% dos escolares utilizavam a correção óptica após um ano. A estimativa da frequência da necessidade de correção óptica, na população estudada, foi de 6.9%. CONCLUSÕES: O erro refracional não corrigido foi a maior causa de baixa acuidade visual entre os escolares. A Campanha foi a primeira oportunidade de exame ocular para a maioria dos escolares. Existe uma parcela de pais que não leva seus filhos para exame, mesmo com oferecimento de facilidades (acesso, transporte, alimentação, duas oportunidades diferentes de exame gratuito realizado em fins de semana e doação de óculos). O absenteísmo poderia ser evitado em 87,1% dos casos, com melhor estruturação da primeira convocação. A reconvocação não é recomendada quando os recursos financeiros são escassosINTRODUCTION: The lack of optical correction was recently recognized as an important cause of low vision and it seems to be an easy problem to be solved with the use of spectacles. However, it is a complex problem from its diagnosis to treatment, which includes medical assistance searching and finding, and spectacles acquisition and use. PURPOSES: To determine the frequency of optical correction need; to determine the impact of the recall of those absent in the ophthalmologic service coverage and its causes; to check the previous ophthalmologic coverage; to check the use of the prescribed optical correction and causes to neglect the use of spectacles. METHOD: An analytical cross-sectional study was conducted. Students between 7 and 10 years old of public education from Guarulhos were screened and referred to ophthalmologic exam in the Eye to Eye Campaign 2006 and 2007. RESULTS: 40.197 students were screened and 11.741 (29,2%) were referred with suspicion of visual problems. The absenteeism in the first call was 42.5% and in the recall 62.2%. The Campaign reached 73.6% of the referred students. The recall expanded the project coverage in 16.1%. The lack of guidelines (parents did not receive notification or referral guide) was the most frequent reason (35.6%) provided by parents for the non attendance, followed by work (20.6%) and disease (12.4%). The need of glasses was not related to the attendance. For 60.2% of the students, it was the first opportunity for ophthalmological exam, whereby 27.3% searched but did not have access to a medical visit. Among the 1.379 students who had already performed an exam, 48.3% used the Public Health System and 1.029 received prescription of glasses in the previous exam. From those, 899 (87.4%) made their glasses and only 590 (57.3%) were wearing glasses on the day of the exam. From the donated spectacles in the Campaign, 84.7% of the students were using the donated optical correction after one year. The estimate of optical correction need within the studied population was 6.9%. CONCLUSIONS: The uncorrected refractive error was the main cause of low visual acuity among students. The Campaign was the first opportunity of ocular exam for most of them. A significant number of parents did not take their children for ophthalmological exams, even when facilities (access, free transportation, meal, two different opportunities of free exam over the weekend and spectacle donation) were offered. For 87.1% of the absenteeism cases, the difficulties could have been overcome via improved structuring of the first call. A recall is not recommended when financial resources are lo

Self-medication: initial treatments used by patients seen in an ophthalmologic emergency room

OBJECTIVE: This study seeks to identify practices of self-medication in the treatment of ocular emergencies. We examine patients' use of both homemade preparations and manufactured products before seeking specialized care. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional analytic survey of consecutive patients seen in the ophthalmology emergency room of a teaching hospital. RESULTS: The sample included 561 subjects, 51.3% males and 48.7% females, with a mean age of 39.8 years. Prior to seeking emergency care, 40.5% reported self-medicating; 29.4% used a homemade preparation (13.9% referred to an industrialized product like boric acid as a homemade preparation), and 11.1% used a manufactured product. The most frequently used products included a boric acid solution (53.3%), a normal saline solution (35.7%), herbal infusions (6.1%) and breast milk (4.8%). Viral conjunctivitis was the most frequent diagnosis (24.4%), followed by the presence of a corneal foreign body (7.4%). No significant differences were found in the self-treatment of ocular injuries according to gender (p = 0.95), level of education (p = 0.21) or age (p = 0.14). In addition, self-medication practices were not related to the medically judged severity of the condition. CONCLUSION: Patients often attempt to treat conditions that require ophthalmologic emergency care by self-medicating with homemade or manufactured products. The most widely used products include boric acid, normal saline, leaf infusions and breast milk. This behavior occurs independently of educational level, gender, age or the nature of the ocular condition. Self-medication is a culturally driven practice that is used even in cases of acute ocular injuries