Background The WHO's Vision 2020 global initiative against blindness, launched in 2000, prioritises children. Progress has been hampered by the global paucity of epidemiological data about childhood visual disability. The British Childhood Visual Impairment and Blindness Study 2 (BCVIS2) was undertaken to address this evidence gap. Methods UK-wide prospective population-based observational study of all those aged under 18 years newly diagnosed with visual impairment or blindness between Oct 1, 2015 and Nov 1 2016. Eligible children were notified simultaneously but independently by their managing ophthalmologists and paediatricians via the two national active surveillance schemes, the British Ophthalmic and Paediatric Surveillance Units. Standardised detailed data were collected at diagnosis and one year later. Incidence estimates and relative rates by key sociodemographic factors were calculated. Descriptive analyses were undertaken of underlying ophthalmic disorders and nonophthalmic comorbidities. FindingsOf 784 cases, 72% had additional non-ophthalmic impairments/disorders and 4% died within the year. Annual incidence was highest in the first year of life, 5•2 per 10,000 (95% CI 4•7-5•7) with cumulative incidence by 18 years of 10•0 per 10,000 (95% CI 9•4 to 10•8). Rates were higher for those from any ethnic minority group, the lowest quintile of socio-economic status, born preterm or with low birthweight. Only 44% had a single ophthalmic condition: disorders of the brain/visual pathways affected 48% overall. Prenatal or perinatal aetiological factors accounted for 84% of all conditions. InterpretationBCVIS2 provides a contemporary snapshot of the heterogeneity, multi-morbidity and vulnerability associated with childhood visual disability in a high income country, and the arising complex needs. These findings will facilitate developing and delivering healthcare and planning interventional research. They highlight the importance of including childhood visual disability as a sentinel event and metric in global child health initiatives.

All previous studies found decreased survival among cataract surgery cohorts. These data differ from data at earlier times, as cataract surgery seems to be associated with increased survival. This illustrates the need for continual re-evaluation of accepted medical knowledge in the light of changes in practice and population demographics.

This study highlights the significant impact IOL opacification has on visual performance and experience, in particular glare and consequent impact on quality of life. The study shows that to quantify accurately the effect of IOL opacification on vision glare must be assessed.

BackgroundIt is now recognised that the majority of breast surgery can be safely undertaken as day case procedures. We aimed to evaluate the effect of pectoral nerve (Pecs2) blocks on recovery parameters and day case rates in patients undergoing mastectomy for breast cancer.MethodsA prospective cohort study was performed in a single NHS Foundation trust between 1st April 2014 and 31st December 2016. Visual analogue scale (VAS) pain scores (0–10) at 4 and 8 h, episodes of post-operative nausea ± vomiting (PONV), opioid use and day case outcome were compared between Pecs2 and no Pecs2 groups.Results22 patients underwent general anaesthesia (GA) + Pecs2 block and 30 GA ± local anaesthetic infiltration.Mean pain scores were significantly lower in the Pecs2 (2.5) vs no Pecs2 (4.6) group at 4 h (p = 0.0132) and 8 h, Pecs2 (1.9) vs no Pecs2 (3.6) (p = 0.0038).Episodes of PONV requiring additional anti-emetic were lower and statistically significant in the Pecs2 group (2/22, 9%) than the no Pecs2 group (14/30, 46%), (p = 0.005).Additional opioid use was significantly lower in the Pecs2 group (4/22, 18%) than in the no Pecs2 group (14/30, 46%) (p = 0.0423).18 patients in the Pecs2 group were discharged the same day in contrast to just 3 patients in the no Pecs2 group. This was highly statistically significant (p = 0.0001).ConclusionsPecs2 blocks can significantly reduce post-operative pain, nausea and vomiting in patients undergoing mastectomy. Their use can enable units to achieve high day-case mastectomy rates.