Logo

Log In Sign Up |  An official publication of: American College of Emergency Physicians
Navigation
  • Home
  • Multimedia
    • Podcasts
    • Videos
  • Clinical
    • Airway Managment
    • Case Reports
    • Critical Care
    • Guidelines
    • Imaging & Ultrasound
    • Pain & Palliative Care
    • Pediatrics
    • Resuscitation
    • Trauma & Injury
  • Resource Centers
    • mTBI Resource Center
  • Career
    • Practice Management
      • Benchmarking
      • Reimbursement & Coding
      • Care Team
      • Legal
      • Operations
      • Quality & Safety
    • Awards
    • Certification
    • Compensation
    • Early Career
    • Education
    • Leadership
    • Profiles
    • Retirement
    • Work-Life Balance
  • Columns
    • ACEP4U
    • Airway
    • Benchmarking
    • Brief19
    • By the Numbers
    • Coding Wizard
    • EM Cases
    • End of the Rainbow
    • Equity Equation
    • FACEPs in the Crowd
    • Forensic Facts
    • From the College
    • Images in EM
    • Kids Korner
    • Medicolegal Mind
    • Opinion
      • Break Room
      • New Spin
      • Pro-Con
    • Pearls From EM Literature
    • Policy Rx
    • Practice Changers
    • Problem Solvers
    • Residency Spotlight
    • Resident Voice
    • Skeptics’ Guide to Emergency Medicine
    • Sound Advice
    • Special OPs
    • Toxicology Q&A
    • WorldTravelERs
  • Resources
    • ACEP.org
    • ACEP Knowledge Quiz
    • Issue Archives
    • CME Now
    • Annual Scientific Assembly
      • ACEP14
      • ACEP15
      • ACEP16
      • ACEP17
      • ACEP18
      • ACEP19
    • Annals of Emergency Medicine
    • JACEP Open
    • Emergency Medicine Foundation
  • About
    • Our Mission
    • Medical Editor in Chief
    • Editorial Advisory Board
    • Awards
    • Authors
    • Article Submission
    • Contact Us
    • Advertise
    • Subscribe
    • Privacy Policy
    • Copyright Information

Science Has Repeatedly Debunked this Stubborn Ophthalmology Myth

By Kevin M. Klauer, DO, EJD, FACEP | on September 19, 2018 | 0 Comment
Features Myths in EM
  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
Print-Friendly Version
Myths in Emergency Medicine: Computed Tomography Pulmonary Angiograms as Imaging Standard, and Radiographs for Pelvic Trauma

New Data Haven’t Changed Ophthalmology’s Myopic View of Topical Anesthetics for Corneal Abrasions

For decades, emergency physicians have challenged the premise that topical anesthetics used for a short duration of time (eg, hours to days) couldn’t possibly harm patients. This seems like a reasonable, common-sense argument, which should prompt widespread adoption. However, emergency physicians who were bold enough to go rogue on this topic were met with great resistance. Apparently, commonsense is no match for the myopic dogma about this topic in the ophthalmological community.

You Might Also Like
  • Medical Marijuana & Junk Science
  • Migraine Care: Why and How to Block the Sphenopalatine Ganglion Nerve
  • Is a Crying Baby an Emergency or Just Normal Infant Behavior?
Explore This Issue
ACEP Now: Vol 37 – No 09 – September 2018

Perhaps, randomized controlled trials would be necessary to unequivocally demonstrate that the safety of the short-term use of topical anesthetics (eg, tetracaine) for corneal abrasions.

The Data

The roots of dogmatism and myth propagation run deep—in this case, very deep. Three credible studies, which were published in 2014, more than adequately reflect the safety of the short-term use of tetracaine for corneal abrasions. The first, was published by Waldman et al in 2014.1 This prospective, randomized, double-blind study of 116 patients compared undiluted tetracaine (1%) to saline in patients presenting with uncomplicated corneal abrasions during a 12-month period. The drops could be applied every 30 minutes while the patient was awake for a maximum of 24 hours. No tetracaine-attributable complications were noted in the treatment group, and there was no statistically significant difference in delayed corneal healing (defined as fluorescein update at 48 hours) between the two groups (23.9 percent for tetracaine versus 21.3 percent for saline).

In 2015, Puls et al performed a systemic review and meta-analysis that included two randomized trials.2 They reported no significant differences in pain, persistent symptoms, or corneal healing. Although their data reflected an odds ratio for delayed healing of 1.31 for those receiving topical anesthetics for 72 hours or less, suggesting 31 percent greater odds for delayed healing with topical anesthetics, the bottom line is that no complications from treatment were noted. Also published in 2015 was a systematic review that included the two randomized trials Puls identified, as well as four additional studies evaluating topical anesthetic use in patients following photorefractive keratectomy.3 They reached similar conclusions: “Our literature search produced two emergency department-based, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies on human patients with corneal abrasions. Additionally, we found four studies that investigated the application of topical anesthetics in patients who underwent photorefractive keratectomy. All six studies demonstrated that a short course of dilute topical anesthetic provided efficacious analgesia without adverse effects or delayed epithelial healing.”

Pages: 1 2 3 4 | Single Page

Topics: AnestheticEyeOphthalmologytetracaine

Related

  • The Real-World Utility of Ophthalmic Tomography

    March 3, 2023 - 0 Comment
  • Tips for Treating Red Eye

    October 3, 2018 - 0 Comment
  • Migraine Care: Why and How to Block the Sphenopalatine Ganglion Nerve

    May 14, 2018 - 21 Comments

Current Issue

ACEP Now: June 2025 (Digital)

Read More

About the Author

Kevin M. Klauer, DO, EJD, FACEP

Kevin M. Klauer, DO, EJD, FACEP, is Chief Medical Officer–hospital-based services and Chief Risk Officer for TeamHealth as well as the Executive Director of the TeamHealth Patient Safety Organization. He is a clinical assistant professor at the University of Tennessee and Michigan State University College of Osteopathic Medicine. Dr. Klauer served as editor-in-chief for Emergency Physicians Monthly publication for five years and is the co-author of two risk management books: Emergency Medicine Bouncebacks: Medical and Legal and Risk Management and the Emergency Department: Executive Leadership for Protecting Patients and Hospitals. Dr. Klauer also serves on the ACEP Board.

View this author's posts »

No Responses to “Science Has Repeatedly Debunked this Stubborn Ophthalmology Myth”

Leave a Reply Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


*
*

Wiley
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Privacy
  • Terms of Use
  • Advertise
  • Cookie Preferences
Copyright © 2025 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc. All rights reserved, including rights for text and data mining and training of artificial technologies or similar technologies. ISSN 2333-2603