ARTICLE INFO

Article Type

Original Research

Authors

Agha Alishiri   A. (* )
Naderi   M. (1 )
Jadidi   Kh. (1 )
Nouriyan   V. (1 )
Rafiezade   P. (2 )






(* ) Department of Ophthalmology, Baqiyatallah University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
(1 ) Department of Ophthalmology, Baqiyatallah University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
(2 ) Department of Ophthalmology, Kerman University of Medical Sciences, Kerman, Iran

Correspondence

Address:
Phone:
Fax:
ophthalmology110@yahoo.com

Article History

Received:  
Accepted:  
ePublished:  

ABSTRACT

Aims Ophthalmia Neonatorum (ON) is defined as conjunctivitis symptoms appearance in the first 28 days of the infant life. The most important causes of ON infection are Nisseria gonorrhea, Chlamidia trachomatis and Staphilococus aureus. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of erythromycin and povidon iodine and artificial teardrop in prevention from ON.
Materials & Methods In this randomized clinical trial, 321 neonates born in a 6 months period at one of the Tehran hospitals and Shari’ati Hospital in Bandar Abbas, arrived in the study randomly. After the sampling from their conjunctiva, erythromycin, tetracycline or artificial tear and povidon iodine drop 2.5% were instilled in the right eye and the left eye were leaved as the control. A questionnaire containing infant and mother information was filled. In the case of symptoms outbreak, eye secretion culture was carried out. Data were analyzed using SPSS13 software and matched-paired T and Chi-square tests.
Results 61 (19%) of cases returned with symptoms of conjunctivitis, and 14 (22.9%) of cases had positive culture. In groups of erythromycin, tetracycline, artificial teardrop and povidon iodine, respectively, 7.9%, 11.58%, 6.25% and 9.1% returned with symptoms. There were no significant difference between the symptom outbreak, microbial culture and the type of used drug as prophylaxis, also no significant difference was observed regarding the type of delivery and ON symptom outbreak.
Conclusion With regard to the insignificancy of the symptom outbreak rate in groups of prophylaxis, the routine use of prophylaxis cannot be presented as a necessity and confirms the more accurate studies in future.


CITATION LINKS