Objectives To describe the attendance and ocular profile of competitors and members of delegations who attended the Polyclinic Ophthalmology Division during the Olympic and Paralympic Games Rio 2016.
Methods The eye clinic was allocated in the purpose-built polyclinic opened for competitors and members of delegations from 24 July to 18 September 2016. All individuals who attended the service received a comprehensive ocular examination including biomicroscopy, subjective refraction and fundus evaluation. A main clinical finding was assigned for each eye by the ophthalmologist.
Results 5.6% of Olympic Games competitors and 8.9% of Paralympic Games competitors attended the Polyclinic Ophthalmology Division during the Rio Olympic and Paralympic Games. These rates compare with 2.6% and 6.5% at the London Olympic and Paralympic Games (2012). The main clinical finding was refractive error with 79.0% of the individuals receiving a glass prescription during the Olympic Games and 81.3% during the Paralympic Games.
Conclusion Our outcomes highlight the importance of the eye service at the polyclinic as it may represent the only opportunity for many individuals involved with the Olympic and Paralympic Games to receive ocular evaluation. Our description of clinic structure, delivery of service and clinical results will be useful in the organisation not only for the Olympic and Paralympic Games Tokyo 2020 but also for any other large sporting events that involves medical attention in a polyclinic format.
- sports medicine
Statistics from Altmetric.com
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
Contributors All the authors met the conditions stated at the ICMJE recommendations for authorship credit.
Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.
Competing interests None declared.
Patient and public involvement Patients and/or the public were not involved in the design, or conduct, or reporting, or dissemination plans of this research.
Patient consent for publication Not required.
Ethics approval The study protocol was approved by the Committee on Ethics in Research of the Fundação do ABC—FMABC and followed the Declaration of Helsinki. Approval ID: 18978619.3.0000.0082.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
Data availability statement Data are available upon reasonable request.