Evaluating the Risk of Eye Injuries: Intraocular Pressure During High Speed Projectile Impacts

Duma, Stefan M.; Bisplinghoff, Jill A.; Senge, Danielle M.; McNally, Craig; Alphonse, Vanessa D.

doi:10.3109/02713683.2011.601841

Cited by 16 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…[45]. Recently, Alphonse et al [46] calculated the injury risk for an increased IOP using correlation between the projectile normalized energy and the IOP by Duma et al [47]. The calculated percentage of injury risks corresponding to the maximum IOP value 0.42 MPa for our simulation are around 98%, 14%, 0%, 0%, 0.02% respectively, for corneal abrasion, hyphema, lens dislocation, retinal damage and globe rupture.…”

Section: Implications To the Eye Injurymentioning

confidence: 80%

A Computational Model of the Eye for Primary and Secondary Blast Injury

Nguyen¹,

Ramesh²,

Schein³

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing this collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden to Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports (0704-0188), 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number. PLEASE DO NOT RETURN YOUR FORM TO THE ABOVE ADDRESS.

show abstract

Section: Implications To the Eye Injurymentioning

confidence: 80%

A Computational Model of the Eye for Primary and Secondary Blast Injury

Nguyen¹,

Ramesh²,

Schein³

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Ms Alphonse and colleagues stated, "Although it is suggested that the pressure wave (ie, blast overpressure) can cause eye injury (scleral bleeding and globe rupture), there is no clear evidence to support this." 1 We are surprised that the described experiment did not induce these types of injuries.…”

Section: Exposure To Firework and Eye Injuriesmentioning

confidence: 83%

“…Previous research has shown that projectiles can cause serious eye injuries due to considerable deformation, penetration, or perforation of the eye. [1][2][3] Our experiments were designed to evaluate overpressure (ie, pressure wave) from a firework explosion as a potential eye injury mechanism.…”

Section: Exposure To Firework and Eye Injuriesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Exposure to Fireworks and Eye Injuries

Rao¹,

Dlouhy²

2012

JAMA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

eral new appointments to the panel in January 2012, consistent with scheduled rotations; others had been members for 2 or more years before the panel was reconvened for the update. We agree with the importance of minimizing conflict of interest and bias within guidelines panels; therefore, the panel does not rely simply on disclosure of conflict of interest.Accordingly, the panel manages conflict of interest with (1) exclusion of individuals who would have a clear financial conflict; (2) prior disclosure and discussion within the committee of circumstances that could be perceived as a potential conflict; (3) recusal from discussion and writing in areas in which potential or perceived conflict may exist; and (4) abstention by panel members from pharmaceutical company-sponsored promotional or marketing activities for a minimum of 1 year prior to joining the panel and throughout the duration of participation. Discussion of these policies and roles of specific panel members was abbreviated in our article because of space limitations.In the complex and fast-paced field of antiretroviral therapy, the IAS-USA Panel believes that there is a need for data to be evaluated by experts who specialize in the field, including those who design and conduct clinical trials. At the same time, the panel is mindful of the need to avoid, disclose, and manage potential and perceived conflicts, whether financial or institutional, involving industry-or governmentsponsored research. Including the panels mentioned above, we believe no human immunodeficiency virus antiretroviral guidelines panel has a stronger or more transparent conflict of interest policy than the IAS-USA Panel.

show abstract

“…A bag of lactated Ringer solution attached to the tube provided an initial physiological human intraocular pressure of 1.99 kPa (14.95 mm Hg). 5 Four pressure sensors (Model 113B21, 1379 kPa, PCB Piezotronics) were mounted around the eye. The total sensor, oriented perpendicular to the blast wave front, measured both dynamic and static pressure; the other 3 sensors, oriented parallel to the blast wave front, measured static pressure.…”

Section: Corneal Abrasionsmentioning

confidence: 99%