Scientific Articles   |    
Eye Protection in Orthopaedic SurgeryAn in Vitro Study of Various Forms of Eye Protection and Their Effectiveness
Alfred A. MansourIII, MD1; Jesse L. Even, MD1; Sharon Phillips, MSPH2; Jennifer L. Halpern, MD1
1 Vanderbilt Orthopaedic Institute, 1215 21st Avenue South, MEC, South Tower, Suite 4200, Nashville, TN 37232-8774. E-mail address for A.A. Mansour: alfred.mansour@vanderbilt.edu
2 Vanderbilt University Medical Center, 1161 21st Avenue South, S-2323 MCN, Nashville, TN 37232-2158
View Disclosures and Other Information
Disclosure: The authors did not receive any outside funding or grants in support of their research for or preparation of this work. Neither they nor a member of their immediate families received payments or other benefits or a commitment or agreement to provide such benefits from a commercial entity. No commercial entity paid or directed, or agreed to pay or direct, any benefits to any research fund, foundation, division, center, clinical practice, or other charitable or nonprofit organization with which the authors, or a member of their immediate families, are affiliated or associated.
A commentary is available with the electronic versions of this article, on our web site (www.jbjs.org) and on our quarterly CD-ROM/DVD (call our subscription department, at 781-449-9780, to order the CD-ROM or DVD).
Investigation performed at the Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee

The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Inc.
J Bone Joint Surg Am, 2009 May 01;91(5):1050-1054. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.H.00460
5 Recommendations (Recommend) | 3 Comments | Saved by 3 Users Save Case


Background: Conjunctival contamination from splashed debris during orthopaedic surgical procedures places surgeons at risk for communicable diseases such as human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and hepatitis B and C. The purpose of this study was to compare the effectiveness of various types of protective eyewear in preventing conjunctival contamination.

Methods: A simulation model was constructed with use of a mannequin head in a typical position of a surgeon's head during an operation. The head was placed at an appropriate distance from the surgical field, and a femoral osteotomy was performed on a cadaver thigh. Six experimental groups were tested to determine the ability of various types of eye protection to prevent contamination of the conjunctiva: (1) modern prescription glasses, (2) standard surgical telescopic loupes, (3) hard plastic contoured glasses, (4) disposable plastic glasses, (5) a combination facemask and eye shield, and (6) no protection (control). Thirty femoral osteotomies were performed, and contamination of both the protective devices and the simulated conjunctival surfaces were recorded.

Results: None of the tested devices were completely effective. The modern prescription glasses and the controls both were associated with conjunctival contamination rates of 83%. The other eye protective devices were associated with significantly lower rates of overall contamination, with a rate of 50% for the loupes, 30% for the facemask and eye shield, 17% for the hard plastic glasses, and 3% for the disposable plastic glasses.

Conclusions: Modern prescription glasses provided no benefit over the control in our experimental model; therefore, we do not recommend that they be used as the sole eye protection, especially during surgical procedures in which there is a high rate of debris expulsion from the wound. Readily available and disposable plastic glasses were associated with the lowest rate of conjunctival contamination (3%) and are an effective means with which to protect the orthopaedic surgeon from communicable diseases by conjunctival contamination.

Figures in this Article
    Sign In to Your Personal ProfileSign In To Access Full Content
    Not a Subscriber?
    Get online access for 30 days for $35
    New to JBJS?
    Sign up for a full subscription to both the print and online editions
    Register for a FREE limited account to get full access to all CME activities, to comment on public articles, or to sign up for alerts.
    Register for a FREE limited account to get full access to all CME activities
    Have a subscription to the print edition?
    Current subscribers to The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery in either the print or quarterly DVD formats receive free online access to JBJS.org.
    Forgot your password?
    Enter your username and email address. We'll send you a reminder to the email address on record.

    Forgot your username or need assistance? Please contact customer service at subs@jbjs.org. If your access is provided
    by your institution, please contact you librarian or administrator for username and password information. Institutional
    administrators, to reset your institution's master username or password, please contact subs@jbjs.org


    Accreditation Statement
    These activities have been planned and implemented in accordance with the Essential Areas and policies of the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME) through the joint sponsorship of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons and The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Inc. The American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons is accredited by the ACCME to provide continuing medical education for physicians.
    CME Activities Associated with This Article
    Submit a Comment
    Please read the other comments before you post yours. Contributors must reveal any conflict of interest.
    Comments are moderated and will appear on the site at the discretion of JBJS editorial staff.

    * = Required Field
    (if multiple authors, separate names by comma)
    Example: John Doe

    Related Content
    The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery
    JBJS Case Connector
    Topic Collections
    Related Audio and Videos
    PubMed Articles
    Clinical Trials
    Readers of This Also Read...
    JBJS Jobs
    PA - Thomas Jefferson University
    DC - Children's National Medical Center
    LA - Ochsner Health System
    NY - Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai