Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33156238›Full record

ArticleOtology & neurotology : official publication of the American Otological Society, American Neurotology Society [and] European Academy of Otology and Neurotology2021

Effect of Personal Protection Equipment (PPE) and the Distance From the Eye Piece of Surgical Microscope on the Field of Vision; An Experimental Study.

Arunachalam Iyer, Theofano Tikka, Nicholas Calder, Sabih Nadeem Qamar, Andy Chin

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Otology & neurotology : official publication of the American Otological Society, American Neurotology Society [and] European Academy of Otology and Neurotology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 24% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Validation of the novel Deep Reality Viewer (DRV) 3D digital stereo viewer in otology surgery.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2022
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Arunachalam IyerDepartment of Otolaryngology and Head Neck Surgery, University Hospital Monklands, Airdrie, Scotland, United Kingdom.
Theofano Tikka
Nicholas Calder
Sabih Nadeem Qamar
Andy Chin
Monklands Hospital · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDuring the Covid-19 pandemic, otolaryngologists are at risk due to aerosol-generating procedures such as mastoidectomy and need enhanced personal protective equipment (PPE). Eye protection can interfere with the use of a microscope due to a reduction in the field of vision. We aimed to study the effect of PPE on the microsurgical field.

methodsFive surgeons measured the visual field using digital calipers at different power settings. They were done with no PPE, a surgical mask, FFP3 mask (N99), and with the addition of small goggles, large vistamax goggles, vistamax plus a face shield, and only a face shield. The measurements were repeated with rings of 5 mm increments. We also measured the "eye relief" of the microscope which is the ideal distance for maximum field of view.

resultsThere was no major reduction of the field with the surgical or FFP3 mask. But even simple goggles reduced the field up to 31.6% and there were progressive reductions of up to 75.7% with large goggles, 76.8% when a face shield was added, and 61.9% when only face shield was used. The distance rings more than 5 mm also affected the field of view.The eye relief of our eyepiece was found to be 15 mm.

conclusionThe current PPE eye protection is not compatible with the use of a microscope. There is scope for research into better eye protection. Mitigation strategies including barrier drapes and alternative techniques such as endoscopic surgery or use of exoscopes should also be considered.

Indexed as

MicrosurgeryOtolaryngologistsVisual FieldsCOVID-19HumansMastoidectomyPersonal Protective EquipmentSARS-CoV-2

Identifiers

PMID33156238
PMCPMC7968955
OpenAlexW3095062792

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.