The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on microbial keratitis presentation patterns.
Adult
Aged
COVID-19
/ epidemiology
Female
Humans
Immunosuppressive Agents
/ therapeutic use
Keratectomy
/ methods
Keratitis
/ epidemiology
Male
Middle Aged
Pandemics
Patient Admission
/ statistics & numerical data
Retrospective Studies
Severity of Illness Index
Tertiary Care Centers
United Kingdom
/ epidemiology
Journal
PloS one
ISSN: 1932-6203
Titre abrégé: PLoS One
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101285081
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2021
2021
Historique:
received:
14
04
2021
accepted:
03
08
2021
entrez:
18
8
2021
pubmed:
19
8
2021
medline:
26
8
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Microbial keratitis (MK) is the most common non-surgical ophthalmic emergency, and can rapidly progress, causing irreversible sight-loss. This study explored whether the COVID-19 (C19) national lockdown impacted upon the clinical presentation and outcomes of MK at a UK tertiary-care centre. Medical records were retrospectively reviewed for all patients with presumed MK requiring corneal scrapes, presenting between 23rd March and 30th June in 2020 (Y2020), and the equivalent time windows in 2017, 2018 and 2019 (pre-C19). In total, 181 and 49 patients presented during the pre-C19 and Y2020 periods, respectively. In Y2020, concurrent ocular trauma (16.3% vs. 5.5%, p = 0.030) and immunosuppression use (12.2% vs 1.7%, p = 0.004) were more prevalent. Despite proportionately fewer ward admissions during the pandemic (8.2% vs 32.6%, p<0.001), no differences were observed in baseline demographics; presenting visual acuity (VA; median 0.6 vs 0.6 LogMAR, p = 0.785); ulcer area (4.0 vs 3.0mm2, p = 0.520); or final VA (0.30 vs 0.30 LogMAR, p = 0.990). Whilst the overall rates of culture positivity were similar in Y2020 and pre-C19 (49.0% vs. 54.7%, p = 0.520), there were differences in the cultures isolated, with a lower rate of poly-microbial cultures in Y2020 (8.3% vs. 31.3%, p = 0.022). Patient characteristics, MK severity and final visual outcomes did not appear to be affected in the first UK lockdown, despite fewer patients being admitted for care. Concurrent trauma and systemic immunosuppression use were greater than in previous years. The difference in spectra of isolated organisms may relate to behavioural changes, such as increased hand hygiene.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Microbial keratitis (MK) is the most common non-surgical ophthalmic emergency, and can rapidly progress, causing irreversible sight-loss. This study explored whether the COVID-19 (C19) national lockdown impacted upon the clinical presentation and outcomes of MK at a UK tertiary-care centre.
METHODS
Medical records were retrospectively reviewed for all patients with presumed MK requiring corneal scrapes, presenting between 23rd March and 30th June in 2020 (Y2020), and the equivalent time windows in 2017, 2018 and 2019 (pre-C19).
RESULTS
In total, 181 and 49 patients presented during the pre-C19 and Y2020 periods, respectively. In Y2020, concurrent ocular trauma (16.3% vs. 5.5%, p = 0.030) and immunosuppression use (12.2% vs 1.7%, p = 0.004) were more prevalent. Despite proportionately fewer ward admissions during the pandemic (8.2% vs 32.6%, p<0.001), no differences were observed in baseline demographics; presenting visual acuity (VA; median 0.6 vs 0.6 LogMAR, p = 0.785); ulcer area (4.0 vs 3.0mm2, p = 0.520); or final VA (0.30 vs 0.30 LogMAR, p = 0.990). Whilst the overall rates of culture positivity were similar in Y2020 and pre-C19 (49.0% vs. 54.7%, p = 0.520), there were differences in the cultures isolated, with a lower rate of poly-microbial cultures in Y2020 (8.3% vs. 31.3%, p = 0.022).
CONCLUSIONS
Patient characteristics, MK severity and final visual outcomes did not appear to be affected in the first UK lockdown, despite fewer patients being admitted for care. Concurrent trauma and systemic immunosuppression use were greater than in previous years. The difference in spectra of isolated organisms may relate to behavioural changes, such as increased hand hygiene.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34407118
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0256240
pii: PONE-D-21-12387
pmc: PMC8372897
doi:
Substances chimiques
Immunosuppressive Agents
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e0256240Subventions
Organisme : Medical Research Council
Pays : United Kingdom
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Références
Neurol Sci. 2021 Jan;42(1):15-20
pubmed: 33021704
J Hyg (Lond). 1984 Jun;92(3):345-55
pubmed: 6429238
Indian J Ophthalmol. 2020 May;68(5):725-730
pubmed: 32317434
Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 2014 Feb;21(1):24-32
pubmed: 24467559
Eye (Lond). 2017 Aug;31(8):1229-1236
pubmed: 28452995
Indian J Ophthalmol. 2020 Aug;68(8):1540-1544
pubmed: 32709770
Eye (Lond). 2011 Apr;25(4):489-93
pubmed: 21252952
Optom Vis Sci. 2008 Jul;85(7):531-7
pubmed: 18594345
Eye (Lond). 2021 Aug;35(8):2146-2154
pubmed: 33288899
PLoS One. 2017 Aug 16;12(8):e0181343
pubmed: 28813424
Int J Health Policy Manag. 2020 Oct 19;:
pubmed: 33105965
Lancet. 2020 Aug 8;396(10248):381-389
pubmed: 32679111
Br J Ophthalmol. 2009 Oct;93(10):1319-24
pubmed: 19502241
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2008 Nov 18;105(46):17994-9
pubmed: 19004758
Eur J Ophthalmol. 2020 Nov 19;:1120672120974944
pubmed: 33213198
Indian J Ophthalmol. 2020 Nov;68(11):2391-2395
pubmed: 33120625
Br J Ophthalmol. 2021 Mar;105(3):328-333
pubmed: 32580955
Eye (Lond). 2020 Jul;34(7):1248-1250
pubmed: 32376977
Curr Eye Res. 1991;10 Suppl:105-10
pubmed: 1864086
Br J Hosp Med (Lond). 2020 Dec 2;81(12):1-8
pubmed: 33377847
Ann Oncol. 2020 Aug;31(8):1065-1074
pubmed: 32442581
Eye (Lond). 2021 Aug;35(8):2322-2323
pubmed: 32811997
Am J Ophthalmol. 2021 Feb;222:368-372
pubmed: 32888901
Br J Ophthalmol. 2020 Nov 26;:
pubmed: 33243832
Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2020 Sep;31(5):423-426
pubmed: 32740065
Ocul Surf. 2020 Jan;18(1):121-129
pubmed: 31693934
Acta Ophthalmol. 2020 Dec 16;:
pubmed: 33326177
BMJ Open Ophthalmol. 2017 Feb 25;1(1):e000044
pubmed: 29354701