Ophthalmic Emergency Department Visits at a Tertiary Medical Center in Israel: Demographics and Clinical Characteristics Over a Six-Month Period

Hamzah Aweidah,1 Ravid Ben-Avi,1 Malak Sultan,2 Zenaa Mittwalli,2 Marina Abdallah,2 Aviya Benyamin,2 Hadas Ben-Eli1,2 1Department of Ophthalmology, Hadassah Medical Organization and Faculty of Medicine, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Kiryat Hadassah, Jerusalem, 91120, Israel; 2Department of Optometry and Vision Science, Jerusalem Multidisciplinary College, Jerusalem, 9101001, IsraelCorrespondence: Hadas Ben-Eli, Department of Ophthalmology, Hadassah Medical Organization and Faculty of Medicine, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Kiryat Hadassah, PO Box 12000, Jerusalem, 91120, Israel, Tel +972-50-4638006, Email hadasben@jmc.ac.il; hadasben@hadassah.org.ilIntroduction: Emergency Department (ED) visits for ophthalmic conditions are common, yet a significant proportion of cases are non-emergent, contributing to ED overcrowding. This study examines the demographics and clinical characteristics of ophthalmic ED visits at Hadassah Medical Center in Jerusalem, Israel.Methods: A retrospective study was conducted on 1,406 patients who presented to the ophthalmic ED between January and June 2018. Data collected from electronic medical records included demographics, chief complaints, diagnoses (classified using ICD-9), and follow-up recommendations. Statistical analyses were performed to assess associations between patient characteristics and clinical outcomes.Results: The study cohort had a mean age of 37.1 ± 23.1 years, with 56.6% male patients. The most common age groups were 15– 34 years (35%) and ≥ 50 years (32%). Anterior segment disorders were the most frequent diagnosis (42.4%), while 15.6% of patients had no ocular pathology. Males had a significantly higher prevalence of ocular trauma (22.1% vs. 12% in females, p< 0.001). Patients aged ≥ 50 years were more likely to present with visual disturbances (43.6%) and required follow-up care more frequently than younger groups. Overall, 83.6% of patients were referred for follow-up ophthalmic care.Conclusion: A substantial proportion of ophthalmic ED visits were for non-emergency conditions, highlighting the need for better triage strategies and expanded community-based ophthalmic services. Although urgency versus non-urgent visits were uncategorized, the proportion of cases without ocular pathology and those referred for follow-up visits was measured as proxy indicators. Increasing public awareness and improving primary eye care accessibility may reduce ED overcrowding and optimize resource utilization. Future studies should explore long-term trends and the impact of healthcare interventions on ophthalmic emergency care.Keywords: Ophthalmic emergency, Ocular parameters, Ocular trauma, Israel