ABSTRACT

Objective:

In this study, it was aimed to compare “incapacity to work rate scale” and “disability rate scale” in isolated eye traumas and to draw attention to differences between the scales.

Methods:

In our study, 605 files for which incapacity to work or disability rate was calculated only due to “eye defects” were examined by Council of Corensic Medicine 3rd Specialization Board in 2016, 2017 and 2018. Five hundred and ninety-two cases were analyzed retrospectively. The cases were evaluated in terms of parameters such as year of event, gender, age range, type of event, court types, and discretion. SPSS 21.0 statistical program was used to evaluate the data.

Results:

It is seen that average of “incapacity to work rate” is 29.24, “disability rate” is 21.56, “incapacity to work rate” is higher than “disability rate” in 455 cases (76.9%) and the “disability rate” is higher than “incapacity to work rate” in 38 cases (6.4%). In 99 cases (16.7%), both rates were not calculated. It was determined that there was a significant difference between rates in terms of both genders. In calculation of “incapacity to work rate”, it was determined that 8.28% of cases did not have exact equivalent of ratio and it was used with discretion, and this situation was all in diplopia cases.

Conclusion:

It was revealed that disability rate scale was more detailed and sensitive than “incapacity to work rate scale”, especially in diplopia, and that there was a difference between both scales in eye diseases in terms of methods and variables.

Keywords: Eye traumas, incapacity to work rate, disability rate

References

Bilgin NG, Hilal A, Çekin N. İş Kazaları, Meslek Hastalıkları ve Maluliyet. Dokgöz H (Ed.). Adli Tıp & Adli Bilimler. Akademisyen Yayınevi. Ankara. p. 785-806.

Hilal A. Challenges in Measuring of Disability. Adli Tıp Bülteni. 2016;21(2). http://doi:10.17986/blm.2016220387.

Ceyhan D, Yaşar T, Demirok A, Çınal A, Esmer O, Batur M. Causes of Visual Impairment in the Van City Area According to the Health Committee’s Reports. Turk J Ophthalmol. 2012;42(2):131-134. https://doi.org/10.4274/tjo.42.63835.

Akın U, Yavuz MS, Tatar G, Aydın F. Medicolegal Evaluation of Commotio Retina Resulting from Blunt Eye Trauma: A Case Report. Van Medical Journal. 2017;24(4):364-366. https://doi.org/10.5505/vtd.2017.29964.

Ekşioğlu Ü. Oküler Travmada Klinik Değerlendirme. Turk J Ophthalmol. 2012;42:16-22. http://doi.org/10.4274/tjo.42.s4.

Esen E, Arslan S, Demircan N. Intraocular Foreign Body Due to Occupational Accident: Was It Destiny for Three Cases? Cukurova Medical Journal. 2013;38(4):779-782. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/47244

Négrel AD, Thylefors B. The global impact of eye injuries. Ophthalmic Epidemiology. 1998;5(3):143-169. https://doi.org/10.1076/opep.5.3.143.8364.

Cebeci Z, Yeniad B, Gezer A. Evaluation of visual acuity with sweep VEP method. Turk J Ophthalmol. 2008;38(4):342-345. https://cms.oftalmoloji.org/Uploads/Article_2913/342_345.pdf

Garbioğlu A. Adli Tıp Genel Kurulunda Karara Bağlanan Maluliyet Dosyalarında Tespit Edilen Çelişki ve Yaklaşım Farklılıklarının Değerlendirilmesi. Uzmanlık Tezi, Adli Tıp Kurumu; İstanbul: 2018.

Budak BA, Kıvanç SA, Başkaya K, Baykara M, Yücel AA. Evaluation of Occupational Closed Globe Eye Injuries. J Clin Anal Med. 2015;6(Suppl 3):375-378. https://doi.org/10.4328/JCAM.3143.

Kaya A, Meral O, Erdoğan N, Aktaş EÖ. The Arrangement of Disability Reports: by the Features of the Cases Applied to Our Department. Adli Tıp Bülteni. 2015;20(3):144–151. http//doi.org/10.17986/blm.2015314259 .

Ünal V, Ünal EÖ, Yener Z, Çetinkaya Z, Çağdır S. Fark Hesabına Dayalı Maluliyet Oranı Tespiti. Türkiye Klinikleri J Med Sci. 2015;12(2):37-46.

Kadı MR, Kadı G, Balcı Y, Göçeoğlu ÜÜ. Permanent Disability Rating Determination and Clinical Regulation: Evaluation of Cases of Muğla Sıtkı Koçman University, Medical Faculty, Forensic Medicine Department. Adli Tıp Bülteni. 2018;23(2):77–88. https://doi.org/10.17986/blm.2018136937.

Reyhan U. Çalışma Gücü Kaybı Oranı Hakkında Karar Verilen Olguların Kurumlar Arası Karşılaştırması. Uzmanlık Tezi, Adli Tıp Kurumu; İstanbul: 2015.

Hilal A, Akgündüz E, Kaya K, Yılmaz K, Çekin N. Retrospective Evaluation of Disability Reports in Cukurova University Forensic Medicine Department. Adli Tıp Bülteni 2017;22(3):189–193. https://doi.org/10.17986/blm.2017332032.

Jovanović M, Stefanović I. Mechanical injuries of the eye: incidence, structure and possibilities for prevention. Vojnosanit Pregl. 2010;67(12):983-990. https://doi.org/10.2298/vsp1012983j.

Gordon KD. The incidence of eye injuries in canada. Can J Ophthalmol. 2012;47(4):351-353. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcjo.2012.03.005.

Dizdar G, Aşırdizer M, Yavuz MS. Celal Bayar Üniversitesi Hastanesi acil servisine başvuran göz travması olgularının değerlendirilmesi. Adli Tıp Dergisi. 2008;22(2):14-20.

AlMahmoud T, Al Hadhrami SM, Elhanan M, Alshamsi HN, Abu-Zidan FM. Epidemiology of eye injuries in a high-income developing country: An observational study. Medicine (Baltimore). 2019;98(26):e16083. https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000016083.

Beshay N, Keay L, Dunn H, Kamalden TA, Hoskin AK, Watson SL. The epidemiology of Open Globe Injuries presenting to a tertiary referral eye hospital in Australia. Injury. 2017;48(7):1348-1354. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2017.04.035.

Gürbüz V. 2013-2016 Yılları arasında Necmettin Erbakan Üniversitesi Meram Tıp Fakültesi Adli Anabilim Dalı Tarafından Düzenlenen Maluliyet Raporlarının Değerlendirilmesi, Ülkemizdeki ve Dünya Çapındaki Kıyaslamaları. Uzmanlık Tezi, Necmettin Erbakan Üniversitesi. 2017. https://acikerisim.erbakan.edu.tr/xmlui/bitstream/handle/20.500.12452/4422/483917%20%281%29.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y

Incapacity to Work Rate and Disability Rate in Traumatic Eye Disorders

ABSTRACT

References