Eye health is essential to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals; vision needs to be reframed as a development issue There is extensive evidence showing that improving eye health contributes directly and indirectly to achieving many Sustainable Development Goals, including reducing poverty and improving work productivity, general and mental health, and education and equity. Improving eye health is a practical and cost-effective way of unlocking human potential. Eye health needs to be reframed as an enabling, cross-cutting issue within the sustainable development framework. Almost everyone will experience impaired vision or an eye condition during their lifetime and require eye care services; urgent action is necessary to meet the rapidly growing eye health need In 2020, 1•1 billion people had distance vision impairment or uncorrected presbyopia. By 2050, this figure is expected to rise to 1•8 billion. Most affected people live in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) with avoidable causes of vision impairment. During the life course, most people will experience vision impairment, even if just the need for reading glasses. Because of unmet needs and an ageing global population, eye health is a major public health and sustainable development concern which warrants urgent political action. Eye health is an essential component of universal health coverage; it must be included in planning, resourcing, and delivery of health care Universal health coverage is not universal without affordable, high quality, equitable eye care. In line with the WHO World report on vision, we urge countries to consider eye care as an essential service within universal health coverage. To deliver comprehensive services including promotion, prevention, treatment, and rehabilitation, eye care needs to be included in national strategic health plans and development policies, health financing structures, and health workforce planning. Coordinated intersectoral action is needed to systematically improve population eye health, also within healthy ageing initiatives, schools, and the workplace. Integration of eye health services with multiple relevant components of health service delivery and at all levels of the health system is of central importance.

BackgroundTrachoma causes blindness through a conjunctival scarring process initiated by ocular Chlamydia trachomatis infection; however, the rates, drivers and pathophysiological determinants are poorly understood. We investigated progressive scarring and its relationship to conjunctival infection, inflammation and transcript levels of cytokines and fibrogenic factors.Methodology/Principal FindingsWe recruited two cohorts, one each in Ethiopia and Tanzania, of individuals with established trachomatous conjunctival scarring. They were followed six-monthly for two years, with clinical examinations and conjunctival swab sample collection. Progressive scarring cases were identified by comparing baseline and two-year photographs, and compared to individuals without progression. Samples were tested for C. trachomatis by PCR and transcript levels of S100A7, IL1B, IL13, IL17A, CXCL5, CTGF, SPARCL1, CEACAM5, MMP7, MMP9 and CD83 were estimated by quantitative RT-PCR. Progressive scarring was found in 135/585 (23.1%) of Ethiopian participants and 173/577 (30.0%) of Tanzanian participants. There was a strong relationship between progressive scarring and increasing inflammatory episodes (Ethiopia: OR 5.93, 95%CI 3.31–10.6, p<0.0001. Tanzania: OR 5.76, 95%CI 2.60–12.7, p<0.0001). No episodes of C. trachomatis infection were detected in the Ethiopian cohort and only 5 episodes in the Tanzanian cohort. Clinical inflammation, but not scarring progression, was associated with increased expression of S100A7, IL1B, IL17A, CXCL5, CTGF, CEACAM5, MMP7, CD83 and reduced SPARCL1.Conclusions/SignificanceScarring progressed in the absence of detectable C. trachomatis, which raises uncertainty about the primary drivers of late-stage trachoma. Chronic conjunctival inflammation appears to be central and is associated with enriched expression of pro-inflammatory factors and altered expression of extracellular matrix regulators. Host determinants of scarring progression appear more complex and subtle than the features of inflammation. Overall this indicates a potential role for anti-inflammatory interventions to interrupt progression and the need for trichiasis disease surveillance and surgery long after chlamydial infection has been controlled at community level.

In this randomized trial, Saul Rajak et al. compare silk sutures (removed at 7–10 days) or absorbable sutures (left in place) during surgery for the management of trachomatous trichiasis.

SummaryBackgroundEyelid surgery is done to correct trachomatous trichiasis to prevent blindness. However, recurrent trichiasis is frequent. Two procedures are recommended by WHO and are in routine practice: bilamellar tarsal rotation (BLTR) and posterior lamellar tarsal rotation (PLTR). This study was done to identify which procedure gives the better results.MethodsA randomised, controlled, single masked clinical trial was done in Ethiopia. Participants had upper lid trachomatous trichiasis with one or more eyelashes touching the eye or evidence of epilation, in association with tarsal conjunctival scarring. Exclusion criteria were age less than 18 years, recurrent trichiasis after previous surgery, hypertension, and pregnancy. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to either BLTR or PLTR surgery, stratified by surgeon. The sequences were computer-generated by an independent statistician. Surgery was done in a community setting following WHO guidelines. Participants were examined at 6 months and 12 months by assessors masked to allocation. The primary outcome was the cumulative proportion of individuals who developed recurrent trichiasis by 12 months. Primary analyses were by modified intention to treat. The intervention effect was estimated by logistic regression, controlled for surgeon as a fixed effect in the model. The trial is registered with the Pan African Clinical Trials Registry (number PACTR201401000743135).Findings1000 participants with trichiasis were recruited, randomly assigned, and treated (501 in the BLTR group and 499 in the PLTR group) between Feb 13, 2014, and May 31, 2014. Eight participants were not seen at either 6 month or 12 month follow-up visits and were excluded from the analysis: three from the PLTR group and five from the BLTR group. The follow-up rate at 12 months was 98%. Cumulative recurrent trichiasis by 12 months was more frequent in the BLTR group than in the PLTR group (110/496 [22%] vs 63/496 [13%]; adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1·96 [95% CI 1·40–2·75]; p=0·0001), with a risk difference of 9·50% (95% CI 4·79–14·16).InterpretationPLTR surgery was superior to BLTR surgery for management of trachomatous trichiasis, and could be the preferred procedure for the programmatic management of trachomatous trichiasis.FundingThe Wellcome Trust.