Volume 214 - Issue 3

Trends in elasticated strap‐related injuries from Melbourne, Australia, 2007–2018

Authors:  Philip Rothschild, Peter Meagher and Thomas G Campbell

Med J Aust 2021; 214 (3): 142-142.e1. || doi: 10.5694/mja2.50903
Published online: 15 February 2021

To the Editor: Elasticated straps — also known as “octopus” straps or bungee cords — are used to secure loads of various shapes and sizes. Unexpected release of the potential energy stored in these straps can cause catastrophic injuries. The Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital (RVEEH) is the largest eye hospital in Australia and is well positioned to assess and treat a variety of ocular injuries. We explored trends in presentations to the RVEEH emergency department (ED) for such injuries between 2007 and 2018, using the ED triage database and information relating to total numbers of ocular trauma presentations. This study was approved by the RVEEH Ethics Committee (09/886H).

Between 2007 and 2018, there were 169 presentations involving an elasticated strap‐related eye injury (145 male and 24 female; mean age, 43.4 years). While most patients had multiple injuries, the most common primary diagnosis was traumatic hyphaema, followed by corneal abrasion and open globe (full‐thickness wounds) injuries (Box). There were 23 admissions, of which 21 required surgical intervention, with vitrectomy, orbital wound exploration and closure, and lensectomy being the most common procedures. The final visual acuity measurements of the 17 patients who were admitted and able to be followed up were 6/36 or better for nine patients and 6/60 or worse for eight patients.

While males presented more frequently than females, the absolute number of yearly presentations by gender was stable.

Elasticated strap‐related injuries accounted for 0.23% of the total 72 663 ocular trauma presentations in the period.

While it is problematic to compare incidence with previous studies, due to factors such as growth of the RVEEH ED, growth of other hospitals around Melbourne, and population growth, elasticated strap‐related eye injuries remain a significant contributor to presentations at the RVEEH. These straps were a known danger in the early to mid‐1990s1 and they remain dangerous more than 20 years later, causing severe ocular damage and requiring operative intervention in 12.4% of patients. Although the total number of elasticated strap‐related eye presentations does not appear to be dramatically rising, the continued presence of severe eye injuries necessitating admission for surgical intervention is cause for concern.

Multiple steps can be taken to address the continued challenge of elasticated strap‐related injuries. Thorough assessment of the patient remains crucial to facilitate prompt treatment of vision‐threatening diagnoses. In addition, preventive measures should be undertaken to lessen the likelihood of visual loss caused by these devices. This includes patient education and encouraging the use of alternative devices that are functionally similar but pose no risks to eyesight, such as non‐elasticated straps that can be gradually tightened, braided metal locking straps, or even self‐contained soft roof rack and strap combinations. Regulators should also consider whether the convenience of elasticated straps justifies the danger they continue to pose to eyesight almost half a century after they were first introduced to Australia and the first eye‐related injury was reported.2

 

Box – Primary diagnoses of elasticated strap‐related eye injury sequelae

Primary diagnosis*

Total cases


Traumatic hyphaema

63 (3.3%)

Corneal abrasion

42 (24.9%)

Open globe injury

11 6.5%)

Conjunctival/lid/canalicular laceration

7 (4.1%)

Commotio retinae

8 (4.7%)

Traumatic iritis/mydriasis/uveitis

7 (4.1%)

Periorbital haematoma

3 (1.8%)

Corneal foreign body

2 (1.2%)

Subconjunctival haemorrhage

2 (1.2%)

Traumatic glaucoma

2 (1.2%)

Conjunctival abrasion

1 (0.6%)

Vitreous haemorrhage

1 (0.6%)

Posterior vitreous detachment

1 (0.6%)

Retinal detachment

1 (0.6%)

Lens dislocation

1 (0.6%)

Other injury

5 (3.0%)

No abnormality detected

7 (4.1%)

Patient did not wait to be seen

5 (3.0%)

Total

169


 

 


Authors


Competing interests


Acknowledgements


References