An unambiguous common language that all professionals in a given field can confidently use is critical for communication, management and research. The publication of a standardized system of classification of ocular trauma terminology in 2016 by Ferenc Kuhn (1) was a watershed moment internationally in the field. Until this time, there was no common language relating to ocular trauma which impeded both clinical care and research relating to the epidemiology, prevention, and management of eye injuries. After almost 25 years, the Birmingham Eye Trauma System (BETTS) is currently the most widely accepted system of classification of ocular trauma.
Several gaps and controversies remain in terminology for ocular trauma (8) (references to be updated) including i) disagreement on the landmark to use in defining the position of Zone II and III; particularly for pediatric patients, ii) absence of a system of classification of traumatic cataracts and iii) absence of a system of classification of foreign bodies and adnexal and non-mechanical injuries (9). The International Globe and Adnexal Trauma Epidemiology Study (IGATES) -Terminology Consensus group was established to address these discrepancies in terminology for Ophthalmic (Ocular & Adnexal) Trauma. The IGATES Terminology Survey is supported by APOTS (Asia Pacific Ophthalmic Trauma Society), ASOT (American Ophthalmic Trauma Society), COTS (Chinese Ocular Trauma Society), Ocular Trauma Society of India (OTSI) and ISOT (International Society of Ocular Trauma).
We are employing a modified Delphi technique to revise and confirm terms for classification of ocular trauma from BETTS and to develop and confirm additional terms not captured in BETTS, specifically terms to classify adnexal injuries and Intraocular Foreign Bodies (IOFB). As an expert in the field of ocular trauma, you have been selected to contribute to this survey. The survey will take approximately 35 minutes to complete, and all answers are to be your own opinion. Filling out the survey will serve as your consent to participate. The study has been approved by the Johns Hopkins Medicine Institutional Review Board (IRB00257431) as an exempt study (Principal Investigator Fasika Woreta, MD, MPH; firstname.lastname@example.org).
The aim of this survey is to:
All the terms that have agreement less than 67% in Round 1 of the Delphi will be discussed in a subsequent Delphi round with “Dialogue” till the consensus is reached. The participants will be asked to suggest new nomenclature, if they deem appropriate, to describe the entity.
Thank you for your participation!References