Self-reported driving difficulty by persons with Hemianopia and Quadrantanopia

Purpose: To compare self-reported driving difficulty by persons with hemianopic or quadrantanopic field loss with that reported by age-matched drivers with normal visual fields; and to examine how their self- reported driving difficulty compares to ratings of driving performance provided by a certified driving rehabilitation specialist(CDRS). Method: Participants were 17 persons with hemianopic field loss, 7 with quadrantanopic loss, and 24 age-matched controls with normal visual fields, all of whom had current drivers’ licenses. Information was collected via questionnaire regarding driving difficulties experienced in 21 typical driving situations grouped into 3 categories(involvement of peripheral vision, low visibility conditions, and independent mobility). On-road driving performance was evaluated by a CDRS using a standard assessment scale. Results: Drivers with hemianopic and quadrantanopic field loss expressed significantly more difficulty with driving maneuvers involving peripheral vision and independent mobility, compared to those with normal visual fields. Drivers with hemianopia and quadrantanopia who were rated as unsafe to drive based upon an on-road assessment by the CDRS were no more likely to report driving difficulty than those rated as safe. Conclusion: This study highlights aspects of driving that hemianopic or quadrantanopic persons find particularly problematic, thus suggesting areas that could be focused on driving rehabilitation. Some drivers with hemianopia or quadrantanopia may inappropriately view themselves as good drivers when in fact their driving performance is unsafe as judged by a driving professional.

Tubal damage, infertility and tubal ectopic pregnancy : chlamydia trachomatis and other microbial aetiologies

Infertility is a worldwide health problem with one in six couples suffering from this condition and with a major economic burden on the global healthcare industry. Estimates of the current global infertility rate suggest that 15% of couples are infertile (Zegers-Hochschild et al 2009) defined as: (1) failure to conceive after 12 months of unprotected sexual intercourse (i.e. infertility); (2) repeated implantation failure following ART cycles; or (3) recurrent miscarriage without difficulty conceiving (natural conceptions). Tubal factor infertility is among the leading causes of female factor infertility accounting for 7-9.8% of all female factor infertilities. Tubal disease directly causes from 36% to 85% of all cases of female factor infertility in developed and developing nations respectively and is associated with polymicrobial aetiologies. One of the leading global causes of tubal factor infertility is thought to be symptomatic (and asymptomatic in up to 70% cases) infection of the female reproductive tract with the sexually transmitted pathogen, Chlamydia trachomatis. Infection-related damage to the Fallopian tubes caused by Chlamydia accounts for more than 70% of cases of infertility in women from developing nations such as sub-Saharan Africa (Sharma et al 2009). Bacterial vaginosis, a condition associated with increased transmission of sexually transmitted infections including those caused by Neisseria gonorrhoeae and Mycoplasma genitalium is present in two thirds of women with pelvic inflammatory disease (PID). This review will focus on (1) the polymicrobial aetiologies of tubal factor infertility and (2) studies involved in screening for, and treatment and control of, Chlamydial infection to prevent PID and the associated sequelae of Fallopian tube inflammation that may lead to infertility and ectopic pregnancy.