Search

ObjectivesTo assess COVID-19-related awareness and knowledge among truck drivers across India and report prevention practices followed, and challenges faced, by them during the COVID-19 lockdown.DesignCross-sectional study.SettingDelhi, Kanpur, Kolkata and Bangalore from July to September 2020.ParticipantsData were collected in Hindi using a structured questionnaire via telephonic interviews. Minimum 200 drivers were included from each location.Outcome measuresSociodemographic profile, awareness regarding COVID-19, knowledge regarding infection sources, disease spread and vulnerable populations, prevention practices followed and challenges faced. Information sources were also assessed.ResultsFisher’s exact test and Analysis of variance (ANOVA) test were used to check for significant differences across proportions. P value less than 0.05 was considered significant. Overall, 1246 drivers were included, with 72% response rate. Of 1246 drivers, 65% were 30–50 years of age. A majority correctly answered knowledge questions regarding communicability (95%) and fatality (66%). Fifty per cent drivers were aware of treatability of the disease, while only 43% and 24% correctly reported all signs and symptoms and routes of transmission, respectively. No driver was aware of all high-risk populations. Overall Knowledge Score is significantly associated with region. Mobile phones were the primary source of information across all regions. Over two-third drivers follow all prevention practices regularly, which differed significantly across regions. Following standard prevention practices was positively correlated with higher knowledge scores and was significantly correlated with mask use. Worry about the disease was common. Less than 40% drivers received full payment for work during this period, while 25% drivers were unable to return home due to the pandemic. Seven per cent and 26% drivers had either limited or no access to food and health services, respectively.ConclusionsAwareness activities and employer provisioned social security/health insurance might safeguard this vulnerable population till the pandemic fully abates as well as in similar situations in the future.

ObjectivesIn this study, we sought to evaluate the extent of further visual field that could be assessed when using stimulus size V in standard automated perimetry compared with size III in advanced stage glaucoma and whether cut-off values could be determined for when to switch from size III to size V.DesignProspective cross-sectional study.SettingSingle-centre outpatient eye clinic in India (New Delhi).ParticipantsAdvanced stage glaucoma defined as stages 3–4.InterventionCentral static perimetry with Octopus 900 G programme (size III stimulus dynamic strategy) and low vision central programme (size V stimulus dynamic strategy).Primary and secondary outcome measuresVisual field assessment for right and left eyes with both sizes III and V were undertaken within one clinic visit.ResultsWe recruited 126 patients (170 eyes). Mean patient age at assessment was 55.86 years (SD 15.15). Means (SD) for size III versus size V, respectively, were 6.94 dB (5.58) and 12.98 dB (7.77) for mean sensitivity, 20.02 dB (5.67) and 19.22 dB (7.74) for mean deviation, 5.89 dB (2.29) and 7.69 dB (2.78) for standard loss variance and 3.32 min (1.07) and 6.40 min (1.43) for test duration. All except mean deviation were significantly different between size III and V tests.ConclusionUseful visual field information was obtained with size V stimuli which allowed continued monitoring of these patients that was not possible with size III. Increased test duration, standard loss variance and mean sensitivity were found with size V, as expected, given that more visual responses were obtained with the increased target size. A switch from size III to V may be considered when mean sensitivity reaches 10 dB and/or mean deviation reaches 18 dB.