| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Copyright © 2009. National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Terms of Use and Privacy Statement |
Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 30
4
Evaluating Risks in
the Military Aviation Environment
The environmental extremes faced by military aviators pose many risks
to the successful wearing of contact lenses, as has been amply demonstrated
in earlier chapters; however, these risks are not all equivalent. Some pose
a greater threat of disrupting lens wear or causing long-term complications
than others, and some risks change in relative importance in the various
aviation scenarios.
The working group divided the principal risk factors into three groups:
high risk factors those most likely to render contact lens use unacceptable
or dangerous; moderate risk factors those of definite concern but unlikely
to cause irremediable problems; and minimal risk factors—those with little
possibility for causing lens failure or long-term complications.
Military aviators generally represent a relatively young and healthy
group, with greater than average immunological resiliency and high mo-
tivation. Such a group would undoubtedly show a lower rate of contact
lens-induced complications than the public if subjected to identical en-
vironmental stresses. In reality, however, the stresses these aviators will
encounter are much more severe than those encountered by civilian contact
lens wearers, and the risks are consequently much greater.
HIGH RISK FACTORS
The panel has identified five factors most likely to render contact lens
use as dangerous or unacceptable:
.
low humidity and high air flow;
· extended wear or overwear;
· unhygienic conditions for lens care;
30
OCR for page 31
EVALUATING RISKS
31
· particulates;
· lack of regular ophthalmic follow-up care by qualified specialists.
These five risks act as the principal determinants in decisions regarding
military lens wear policy for aviators, involving lens type, wear mode, care
regimen, and follow-up care schedule.
Low Humidity and High Air Flow
Low cockpit humidity and the related problem of air flow directed in
the vicinity of the eyes can be regarded as the single greatest threat to
the aviator's ability to wear lenses comfortably and avoid complications.
Good data do not exist describing the humidity level below which dry-eye
symptoms become a problem or at what level they become unbearable, but
clinical experience clearly demonstrates that the 5 to 15 percent humidity
levels present in aircraft are sufficiently low to cause difficulties.
Humidity-induced dryness will undoubtedly cause lens discomfort for
many aviators perhaps a third or more—and may make some dysfunc-
tional, depending on the length of exposure. Dehydration of hydrogels
will also decrease oxygen transmission through the lens and may result in
acuity changes as the lens shrinks and the fit changes. Repeated exposure
may precipitate more severe complications if substantial irritation of ocular
surfaces occurs.
High air flow or air blowing across the face is also worrisome, since
it can exacerbate the drying effect. This may be of special concern when
chemical-protective hoods are employed, some of which have air volumes
of as much as 4 ft3/min passing through them. It should be noted that Oc-
cupational Health and Safety Administration (OSHA) regulations prohibit
contact lens use with full-face respirators because of evidence that air flow
in these respirators irritates contact lenses. In those cases in which the
air stream is adjustable, contact lens wearers should be warned to direct it
away from the eyes.
Extended Wear or Overwear
Extended wear of contact lens is known to be associated with increased
levels of ocular pathology. When the bounds of a given extended-wear
regime are exceeded, the risk of complications increases even more. In all
the military settings considered here, the nature of the missions dictates
that extended wear will either be the predominant wear mode or will at
least be experienced occasionally.
Moreover, there is every chance that in some scenarios, such as he-
licopter missions, overwear beyond approved wear times will become a
distinct possibility. In time of war, wear time for aviators involved in
OCR for page 32
32
CONTACT I INS USE UNDER ADVERSE CONDITIONS
combat will probably be dictated by factors beyond the wearer's control.
In all of these cases, the risk of complications is greatly magnified, and
the potential severity of these complications may eventually ground some
aviators or result in their inability to continue contact lens wear.
Simply put, the eye of the contact lens wearer requires occasional rest.
There is good reason to expect that successful contact lens wear depends
to a great extent on the recovery process the eye undergoes when the lens
is removed. Some believe this normalization period is as important to lens-
wearing success as is proper lens fit or good lens hygiene. Evidently, the eye
needs sufficient time without the lens in place to cope with the inevitable
ocular insult occurring with lens wear. If this rest time is eliminated,
complications may result.
Unhygienic Conditions for Lens Care
Hygiene is always a consideration in lens wear, particularly for hydro-
gel lenses, which can be easily contaminated and can act as fertile ground
for the culture of infectious organisms. Even under the best of circum-
stances, incomplete sterilization of lenses, contamination of lens solutions,
or contamination of the lens upon insertion can occur. In unsanitary field
conditions, the chances are many times greater that some form of ocular
contamination will occur, with a corresponding increase in the likelihood
of infection.
The subject of unhygienic conditions is of particular importance to
assault helicopter missions conducted by the Army and the Marines. In
them, field conditions may prevail for one to many weeks, with no obvious
means of ensuring sterile lens insertion or removal or even adequate lens
cleaning, especially in combat situations.
As stated in the previous chapter, the consequences of ocular contami-
nation are magnified in extended-wear scenarios, yet helicopter missions are
precisely those likely to require the greatest use of the extended-wear mode
because of their length. Further compounding the situation is the high level
of particulate contamination that helicopter aircrews are subjected to. If
this constant particle bombardment causes corneal or lid irritation, the
chances for infection after contamination are again increased.
It has been suggested that the use of disposable lenses might answer
some of the concerns about hygiene. Certainly it would eliminate some
potential sources of contamination by obviating the need for lens cleaning
and disinfection. However, it would not ensure sterile insertion, unless
additional measures were employed, such as the use of sterile finger cots
to apply the lens. More importantly, use of disposable lenses might itself
be a source of substantial complications when used in a field environment.
OCR for page 33
EVALUATING RISKS
33
Currently available disposable lenses have unfinished edges, which may
irritate the cornea and lid.
Participates
The presence of high levels of Articulates in the cabin air is prevalent
in every aviation scenario the panel considered. Particulate contamination
in helicopters is especially severe, but F-A-R and T-T-B aircraft also show
high particle counts. The cockpit is a dirty place and, according to military
representatives, this cannot be easily remedied with the installation of
filters.
Fortunately, hydrogel lenses minimize the problems caused by particu-
late contamination and may even act as a protective barrier against particle
irritation of the cornea. Rigid lenses are much more sensitive to foreign
body involvement. The safety of the aircrew and the completion of the mis-
sion could be jeopardized by a severe reaction to a foreign body, especially
in a high-performance aircraft. Smaller particles may simply cause milder
ocular irritation, but if experienced on a routine basis, it may precipitate
other acute or chronic complications. In light of this risk, the working
group feels that rigid lenses are impractical in all of the aviation settings
considered.
It is important to realize that even the use of hydrogel lenses does
not render particle-laden environments benign. Rather, high-particulate
environments are rightly regarded as stressful to any contact lens wearer.
Indeed, little is known about the effects of a constant barrage of Articulates
on the hydrogel lens wearer, as is expected in the helicopter setting. It
is likely that such a high particle count simply adds to the physiological
burden with which the eye must cope.
Inadequate Follow-Up Care
For the majority of military aviators wearing contact lenses, the avail-
ability of regular and competent care may not pose any risk at all. But for
those based on aircraft carriers or with extended field assignments who do
not have access to professionals with considerable experience in caring for
contact lens patients, the risk may be high. Flight surgeons and other med-
ical professionals are unlikely to have training and experience in contact
lens fitting and care. Careful monitoring of contact lens-wearing aviators
is essential to both preventing complications and ensuring that those that
do arise do not become debilitating. If this monitoring cannot be ensured,
then the probability of problem-free wear declines markedly.
OCR for page 34
34
CON1;4CT IONS USE UNDER ADVERSE CONDITIONS
MODERATE RISK FACTORS
The following three factors, though of definite concern, are unlikely to
cause irremediable problems for contact lens wearers.
Hypoxia
Contact lens-wearing aviators in high performance aircraft will almost
certainly be subjected to moderately or severely hypoxic conditions, al-
though they will ordinarily encounter these conditions for only a limited
time. For this reason, it is expected that comeal edema or other hyponc
effects, even when they occur, will not pose a great risk to these aviators. So
too, T-T-B aviators with contact lenses may encounter hypoxic conditions
for more extended periods, but the expected hypoxia is mild enough to be
of little concern if adequate rest time with lenses out is available after the
flight.
Of greater concern is the possibility of repeatedly experiencing hypoxic
conditions while using contact lenses in an extended-wear mode when
inadequate recovery time is allowed. In any case, no consequences to
visual acuity are expected but, as mentioned before, frequent assault by
hypoxic conditions may compromise corneal health and ultimately lead to
more serious complications.
Noxious Fumes
Surprisingly, there is a lack of good data on the levels of cockpit
contamination by noxious fumes or vapors. It is therefore difficult to
determine the level of risk they pose. Nonetheless, the panel believes that
the possibility for the presence of compounds that can act as lens irritants
is severe. Even if the only such irritants are cigarette smoke and ozone,
the potential irritation they can cause should not be discounted. Happily,
cigarette smoke is one irritant that can be easily eliminated in the aviation
environment by mandate.
Overmotivation
The pilot's self-image and fear of being grounded may result in no
reported symptoms until a full-blown complication is evident. How much of
a risk this poses is not known, but even a small percentage of unnecessary
complications is a serious matter. It is quite possible that this risk can be
minimized through careful education of contact lens wearers, a program of
regular ophthalmic monitoring, and a few judicious regulations aimed at
lessening the fear of reporting symptoms or imposing penalties for doing
so.
OCR for page 35
EVALlL4lING RISKS
35
ANIMAL RISK FACTORS
In this section, we address factors with little possiblity for causing lens
failure or long-term complications.
Bubble Formation From Vapid Decompression
Bubble formation is not expected to be a problem with lens materials
that allow gas exchange, such as those used in hydrogel or RGP lenses.
Though bubbles are known to form beneath both these lens types, in neither
case do the bubbles persist very long, nor is visual acuity adversely affected.
High G-Forces
Expenencing high acceleration is part of piloting high-performance
aircraft. The G-forces exerted in this process are substantial and the
decentering effect they have on small-diameter PMMA lenses is well doc-
umented, as well as its consequences to vision. However, there is evidence
that hydrogel and large RGP lenses tolerate high G-forces well without sub-
stantial Recentering. With lens movement thus minimized, no complications
are expected to result.
Temperature Extremes
Extremes in temperature are not expected to pose any particular risk
to contact lens wearers. In fact, it is possible that contact lenses may act to
insulate the eye from temperature extremes. In any case, clinical experience
shows that contact lens wearers can participate in both cold winter and hot
summer outdoor activities with no hindrance from their lenses.
Representative terms from entire chapter:
lens wearers