ArticleJournal of ophthalmic inflammation and infection2024
Bacterial contamination in contact lens training area in private optical clinics.
Article in Journal of ophthalmic inflammation and infection, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundContamination in the contact lens training area could be due to bacteria, which can lead to the major consequence of ocular infections. We aimed to investigate the contamination caused by bacteria in the contact lens training area in private optical clinics of the Udupi district, India.
methodsA cross-sectional study evaluated the swabs from the contact lens container, contact lens solution tip, washing area and lens fitting area for bacterial contamination. Twenty swabs collected from different areas of five optical clinics were inoculated in Brain heart infusion broth (BHIB). The broth was streaked in MacConkey and Blood agar and incubated at standard conditions for the growth of bacteria. All isolates were identified using conventional culture methods, and Gram staining was performed.
resultsTwenty samples (contact lens case, n = 5; contact lens solution tip, n = 5; washing area, n = 5; cleaning towel, n = 5) from private optical clinics were recruited for the study. Bacterial growth was indicated in which lactose fermentation was seen at (15%), non-lactose fermentation at (35%), and no bacterial growth at (50%) in MacConkey agar. Partial or alpha-hemolytic (α hemolysis) was seen in (5%), complete or beta-hemolytic (β hemolysis) was seen in (40%), no hemolysis or gamma hemolysis (ϫ haemolysis), was seen in (30%), no growth was seen in (25%) on blood agar. Gram-positive cocci (45%), Gram-negative bacilli (20%), and no increase in (35%) were observed in MacConkey agar and Blood agar. Bacterial species were not identified in this study.
conclusionContamination was found in lenses, solution tips, washing areas, and cleaning towels which might lead to ocular infections. Perception should be given to those responsible for fitting lenses.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.