Preservative

This study was conducted to examine the preservatives and pesticide usage in some sawmills in Ovia North East Local Government Area Benin City. This study adopted purposive sampling techniques. Data collection, involved field survey and the field survey involved using questionnaires to collect data in conformity with the objectives. The survey data were analyzed using descriptive statistics such as, frequency distribution table, mean, and percentages. The majority (98%) of the respondents were male and the age distribution showed a predominance of relatively young workers. Most (63.1%) of the workers were married, and the educational distribution of respondents shows that the largest group has completed senior secondary school (34.5%), Work experience was also diverse, with a substantial number of experienced workers in the industry. Khaya spp (Mahogany), Milicia excelsa (Iroko), Triplochiton scleroxylon (Obeche), and Lovoa trichilioides (African Walnut) were among the most commonly supplied species. The source of timber supply to the sawmill indicated a higher percentage from natural forests and from another sawmill. While using naturally rot-resistant wood was a common method of treatment, the presence of wood- attacking insects of the order: Isoptera, Hemiptera and Coleoptera posed challenges to wood preservation. Chemical preservatives like Solignum and Attack were widely used. Pesticides and preservatives are used to protect wood products against these insect attacks, thus extending their lifespan. The method of application of preservatives and pesticides showed that brushing and spraying were the most prevalent methods. Based on the study and results obtained, the following recommendations are suggested: Sawmill operators should explore and adopt environmentally friendly wood preservation methods, such as heat treatment, borate-based preservatives, and naturally rot-resistant wood species. This will help minimize environmental impacts and enhance the industry's eco-friendliness.

This comparative study investigated the effects of preservative and preservative-free artificial tears on tear stability among dry eye patients. The participants completed the OSDI questionnaire to determine their subjective observations. A randomized controlled trial was used to group the participants. Tear film stability was assessed using fluorescein invasive tear break-up time (FTBUT), Schirmer’s test was carried out to determine the tear flow rate, the results were compared between the two groups. The results showed that the mean values for TBUT for Hypromellose were 6.25 ± 0.33 before and 6.75 ± 0.31seconds after, for Refresh was 6.40 ± 0.40 before and 7.55 ± 0.42 seconds after. Also, the mean values for TFR for Hypromellose were 8.36 ± 0.50 before and 8.61 ± 0.50 seconds after, for refresh was 9.69 ± 0.54 before and 10.05 ± 0.55 after seconds. The results obtained were analyzed using the SSPS 22.0. T-test and one- way ANOVA were used to compare the mean FTBUT and TFR values between both groups, the p values were 0.64 and 0.68 respectively. There was no statistically significant difference in the tear film stability and tear flow rate between both groups after four weeks (p > 0.05). In conclusion, the results of this study showed that there was no notable difference between preservative artificial tears and preservative-free artificial tears on tear film stability and tear flow rate. It is recommended that clinicians can confidently recommend both preservative and preservative-free artificial tears as effective management options for dry eye. KEYWORDS: Dry eye syndrome, Artificial tears, Preservative, TBUT

This comparative study investigated the effects of preservative and preservative-free artificial tears on tear stability among dry eye patients. The participants completed the OSDI questionnaire
to determine their subjective observations. A randomized controlled trial was used to group the participants. Tear film stability was assessed using fluorescein invasive tear break-up time (FTBUT), Schirmer’s test was carried out to determine the tear flow rate, the results were compared between the two groups. The results showed that the mean values for TBUT for Hypromellose were 6.25 ± 0.33 before and 6.75 ± 0.31seconds after, for Refresh was 6.40 ± 0.40 before and 7.55 ± 0.42 seconds after. Also, the mean values for TFR for Hypromellose were 8.36 ± 0.50 before and 8.61 ± 0.50 seconds after, for refresh was 9.69 ± 0.54 before and 10.05 ± 0.55 after seconds. The results obtained were analyzed using the SSPS 22.0. T-test and one- way ANOVA were used to compare the mean FTBUT and TFR values between both groups, the p values were 0.64 and 0.68 respectively. There was no statistically significant difference in the tear film stability and tear flow rate between both groups after four weeks (p > 0.05). In conclusion, the results of this study Showed that there was no notable difference between preservative artificial tears and preservative-free artificial tears on tear film stability and tear flow rate. It is recommended that clinicians can confidently recommend both preservative and preservative-free artificial tears as effective management options for dry eye