<HashMap><database>biostudies-literature</database><scores/><additional><omics_type>Unknown</omics_type><volume>67(3)</volume><submitter>Chiku Y</submitter><pubmed_abstract>&lt;h4>Purpose&lt;/h4>To investigate the impact of the local alert levels regarding coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on the clinical patterns of rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (RRD) in Japan.&lt;h4>Study design&lt;/h4>Retrospective, single-center, consecutive case series.&lt;h4>Methods&lt;/h4>We compared two groups of RRD patients, a COVID-19 pandemic group and a control group. Based on the local alert levels in Nagano, five periods during the COVID-19 pandemic were further analyzed: epidemic 1 (state of emergency), inter-epidemic 1, epidemic 2 (second epidemic duration), inter-epidemic 2, and epidemic 3 (third epidemic duration). Patients' characteristics, including symptoms' duration before visiting our hospital, macula status, and retinal detachment (RD) recurrence rate in each period, were compared with those in a control group.&lt;h4>Results&lt;/h4>There were 78 patients in the pandemic group and 208 in the control group. The pandemic group had a longer duration of symptoms than the control group (12.0 ± 13.5 days vs. 8.9 ± 14.7 days, P = 0.0045). During the epidemic 1 period, patients had a higher rate of macula-off RRD (71.4% vs. 48.6%) and RD recurrence (28.6% vs. 4.8%) than the control group. This period also demonstrated the highest rates compared to all other periods in the pandemic group.&lt;h4>Conclusion&lt;/h4>During the COVID-19 pandemic, RRD patients significantly delayed visiting a surgical facility. They showed a higher rate of macula-off and recurrence compared to the control group during the state of emergency than during other periods of the COVID-19 pandemic, although the difference was not statistically significant due to the small sample size.</pubmed_abstract><journal>Japanese journal of ophthalmology</journal><pagination>255-263</pagination><full_dataset_link>https://www.ebi.ac.uk/biostudies/studies/S-EPMC9932397</full_dataset_link><repository>biostudies-literature</repository><pubmed_title>Impact of local COVID-19 alert levels on rhegmatogenous retinal detachment.</pubmed_title><pmcid>PMC9932397</pmcid><pubmed_authors>Hirano T</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Hoshiyama K</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Murata T</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Chiku Y</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Iesato Y</pubmed_authors></additional><is_claimable>false</is_claimable><name>Impact of local COVID-19 alert levels on rhegmatogenous retinal detachment.</name><description>&lt;h4>Purpose&lt;/h4>To investigate the impact of the local alert levels regarding coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on the clinical patterns of rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (RRD) in Japan.&lt;h4>Study design&lt;/h4>Retrospective, single-center, consecutive case series.&lt;h4>Methods&lt;/h4>We compared two groups of RRD patients, a COVID-19 pandemic group and a control group. Based on the local alert levels in Nagano, five periods during the COVID-19 pandemic were further analyzed: epidemic 1 (state of emergency), inter-epidemic 1, epidemic 2 (second epidemic duration), inter-epidemic 2, and epidemic 3 (third epidemic duration). Patients' characteristics, including symptoms' duration before visiting our hospital, macula status, and retinal detachment (RD) recurrence rate in each period, were compared with those in a control group.&lt;h4>Results&lt;/h4>There were 78 patients in the pandemic group and 208 in the control group. The pandemic group had a longer duration of symptoms than the control group (12.0 ± 13.5 days vs. 8.9 ± 14.7 days, P = 0.0045). During the epidemic 1 period, patients had a higher rate of macula-off RRD (71.4% vs. 48.6%) and RD recurrence (28.6% vs. 4.8%) than the control group. This period also demonstrated the highest rates compared to all other periods in the pandemic group.&lt;h4>Conclusion&lt;/h4>During the COVID-19 pandemic, RRD patients significantly delayed visiting a surgical facility. They showed a higher rate of macula-off and recurrence compared to the control group during the state of emergency than during other periods of the COVID-19 pandemic, although the difference was not statistically significant due to the small sample size.</description><dates><release>2023-01-01T00:00:00Z</release><publication>2023 May</publication><modification>2026-03-27T15:47:39.896Z</modification><creation>2025-02-19T04:00:01.837Z</creation></dates><accession>S-EPMC9932397</accession><cross_references><pubmed>36795332</pubmed><doi>10.1007/s10384-023-00980-1</doi></cross_references></HashMap>