Evidence Hub

Aerosol container-related eye injuries in the United States: 1997-2009

Seidman CJ, Linakis JG, Mello MJ, Greenberg PB

American journal of ophthalmology, 2011

Abstract

PURPOSE: To quantify and characterize eye injuries related to aerosol container consumer products treated in United States hospital emergency departments (EDs) from 1997 through 2009.

DESIGN: Retrospective study.

METHODS: Descriptive analysis of aerosol container-related eye injury data derived from the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System, a stratified probability sample of hospital-affiliated United States EDs. Data collected included demographic variables (gender and age), locale, diagnoses, and hospital disposition associated with aerosol container-related eye injuries treated in United States EDs from 1997 through 2009. Products associated with injury and mechanisms of injury also were extracted and analyzed.

RESULTS: There were an estimated 10 765 (95% confidence interval [CI], 9842 to 11 688) visits to United States EDs for aerosol container-related eye injuries during the study period; 6756 (95% CI, 5771 to 7742; 63%) patients were male; 5927 (95% CI, 4956 to 6897; 55%) injuries occurred in children (age < 18 years). The most common product was spray paint, accounting for 2048 (95% CI, 1402 to 2694; 19%) injuries. The most common mechanism of injury was self-inflicted spray to the eye, occurring in 4649 (95% CI, 3746 to 5552; 43%) cases. The most common diagnosis was dermatitis or conjunctivitis, occurring in 3880 (95% CI, 2995 to 4765; 36%) cases.

CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that most aerosol container-related eye injuries in the United States occur…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free