Purpose: The study intends to evaluate the demographic and clinical profile of pediatric patients (0–18 years) attending six vision centers (VCs) of a tertiary eye care facility in south India. Methods: This is a cross-sectional observation study conducted at six major peripheral VCs of a tertiary eye care facility in South India from June 20 to Dec 20. All children presenting at the VCs under a base hospital (BH) in Pondicherry, whose parents gave consent were included. Data were entered by the ophthalmic assistants in the VC and cross checked by the principal investigator at the BH. Results: A total of 250 pediatric patients were brought to the VCs during the study period, predominantly males (60.8%), with a mean age of 8.2 ± 4.5 years (0–18 years). Half of them were staying within 5 km from the VCs. Most children were escorted by their parents (88%), and the expenditure of travel to the VC was affordable for most of the parents (75%). Also, 53.6% of patients were in their primary school, while schooling had not started for 28% of children. Visual acuity (VA) could be assessed only for school-going children and older children due to lack of age-matched VA assessment tools. Most children (91.3%) had uncorrected VA better than or equal to 6/18 in the better eye, and approximately 3% had VA worse than 6/60. All patients had best corrected VA of 6/6–6/18 after cycloplegic refraction. Most children reported to the VC for allergic conjunctivitis (25%), followed by refractive error (13%) and squint (10.4%). Urgent referral to the BH was made for 47 children. Conclusion: Primary eye care in pediatric population-I (PREPP-I) showed that most children can be treated at the VCs and only one-fifth of the children require active intervention at higher referral centers. Further study on satisfaction of services provided for pediatric patients in these VCs and barriers of not reporting to the BH when referred are considered for the PREPP-II study.

Purpose: This study was done to evaluate the clinical profile in pediatric patients (0–16 years) presenting with acute onset esotropia due to sixth nerve palsy and its management options in a tertiary care set up of Southern India. Methods: A total of 12 patients presenting to our OPD with acute onset esotropia due to sixth nerve palsies were included in this retrospective study. All patients were observed for 6 months and managed with prism and/or patching while waiting for spontaneous resolution and later managed surgically. Neuroimaging was done in all cases. Results: The mean deviation of esotropia at presentation was 30.17 ± 5.7 Prism Diopter (range 12–50 Prism Diopter 95% CI, SD 10.11). Mean age of the patients during presentation was 8.6 ± 2.4 years (range: 1–15 years, SD 4.27). Among the common causes of sixth nerve palsy in our study population were trauma and idiopathic intracranial hypertension followed by tumor and miscellaneous causes. Only three patients underwent surgical correction of residual deviation after a waiting period of 6 months for self-resolution. Spontaneous resolution was observed in 41.6% patients, and surgical correction (unilateral resection–recession) was done in 25% of the patients with good surgical outcome. Conclusion: At 1-year follow up, the motor outcome was satisfactory except for one patient who had diffuse pontine glioma and had worsening neurological symptoms on follow-up.