The marks of gunshot wounds to the face

IntroductionThis article deals with the occurrence of health problems due to gunshot wounds to the face among military police officers, in the metropolitan region of Rio de Janeiro, who were submitted to surgery at the Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery and Traumatology Clinic of Hospital Central da Polícia Militar.ObjectiveTo identify the profile of patients submitted to surgery as a result of gunshot wounds, the anatomical distribution of maxillofacial fractures, the identified sequelae and complications, the health specialties involved in the rehabilitation of these patients, and to discuss the social, emotional and work performance-related effects of work among these subjects.MethodsA retrospective epidemiological study was carried out based on secondary data from military police officers who were submitted to surgery at Hospital Central da Polícia Militar due to gunshot wounds from June 2003 to December 2017.ResultsDuring the study period, 778 surgeries were performed in the operating room by the Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery and Traumatology service at Hospital Central da Polícia Militar, 186 of which were due to gunshot wounds (23.9%). All patients were males and the mean age 34.7 years. Bone segment loss was the most common sequela. Facial esthetic impairment and reports of insomnia were the most often identified late consequences of impact on health and social life. Regarding the occupational impacts of the sustained injury, the mean time away from work due to medical leave for the treatment of maxillofacial injuries was 11.7 months.ConclusionThe treatment of gunshot wounds patients with facial injuries requires multiple surgical interventions and their rehabilitation requires the involvement of different health specialties. Further studies are needed to qualitatively analyze the impact of this type of facial trauma on the patients' lives and their social consequences.     

Outcomes of low-vision services using optometric and multidisciplinary approaches: a non-randomized comparison

Consecutive patients (n = 215) who were referred to optometric (55%) or multidisciplinary (45%) low-vision services and above 50 years of age were recruited from four hospitals in the Netherlands. They completed two vision-related quality of life questionnaires, the Vision Quality of Life Core Measure (VCM1) and the Low Vision Quality of Life Questionnaire (LVQOL), before their first visit with low-vision services and 1 year later. At follow-up, patients referred to multidisciplinary low-vision services had lower scores on the mobility subscale of the LVQOL than patients referred to optometric low-vision services [5.3 points; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.2-10.5]. Paired sample t-tests for the two groups of patients taken together show improvement for the VCM1 (3.1 points; 95% CI: 0.6-5.6) and deterioration for the basic aspects of vision (3.5 points; 95% CI: 1.1-5.9) and the mobility (6.6 points; 95% CI: 3.7-9.5) subscales of the LVQOL. In conclusion, people referred to optometric services showed less deterioration in mobility than those referred to multidisciplinary services. No differences were observed for any of the other subscales of the LVQOL and the VCM1. Future research in this field should include randomized controlled designs comparing low-vision services with no treatment or placebo.