You are here

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
Case Reports: Learning from unexpected outcome (positive or negative)
Potential cost of assumptions within a visual assessment
  1. Chloe Shipton,
  2. Kanna Ramaesh and
  3. David Lockington
  1. Ophthalmology, Tennent Institute of Ophthalmology, Glasgow, UK
  1. Correspondence to Dr Chloe Shipton; chloe.shipton3{at}nhs.scot

Abstract

We report a man in his 80s who described sudden unilateral loss of vision, resulting in extensive urgent investigations by the accident and emergency department team. Subsequent evaluation of visual acuity with pinhole demonstrated significant improvement, triggering further questioning. It transpired that he was mistakenly wearing his wife’s glasses, which accounted for his visual symptoms. This case illustrates the importance of a stepwise approach to visual assessment, and avoiding assumptions, as using the simple pinhole test could have avoided extensive investigations and their subsequent costs.

  • Visual pathway
  • Primary Care

https://doi.org/10.1136/bcr-2022-253744

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Contributors CS: conception of work, drafting the work, final approval and agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work. KR: design of work, revising the work, final approval of the work and agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work. DL: design of work, revising the work, final approval of the work and agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work.

    • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

    • Case reports provide a valuable learning resource for the scientific community and can indicate areas of interest for future research. They should not be used in isolation to guide treatment choices or public health policy.

    • Competing interests None declared.

    • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.