Causes of visual impairment in children

Knowledge of the epidemiology of visual impairment in children forms one of the cornerstones of pediatric ophthalmology. In contrast to e.g. the other Nordic countries, Sweden has had no efficient and continuous registration of visually impaired children. An epidemiological study on this subject has now been done, collecting data on all children and adolescents registered at the Low Vision Clinics throughout Sweden. In this work data on 2373 visually impaired children, 0–19 years of age and living throughout Sweden are presented. Data collected in the study include sex, date of birth, county, ocular diagnosis, systemic diagnosis, classification of visual impairment, aetiology and possible additional impairments. The prevalence of visual impairment as defined by WHO was 10.9/10 000 inhabitants in the current age group. A slight male preponderance was seen compared to the total population 0–19 years. This was not reduced when only non‐genetic aetiological factors were taken into consideration. A total of 45% of the children had only a moderate visual impairment (WHO category 1), whereas approximately 25% were found in WHO categories 3,4 and 5, i.e. fulfilled the requirements for blindness. Additional impairments were found in 60% of the children. Mental impairment in combination with motor impairment or mental impairment exclusively were the most common ones seen.

Section: Fig 2 Prevalence Of Visual Impairment In Different Age Grosupporting

confidence: 94%

Section: Fig 2 Prevalence Of Visual Impairment In Different Age Gromentioning

confidence: 94%

Visual impairment in Swedish children

Blohmé

Törnqvist

1997

“…Table 7 also presents statistics on visual impairment in the general Dutch population. These figures were extrapolated from available data on visual impairment in children (van der Pol 1986; Melief & Gorter 1998) and elderly people (Klaver et al 1998). The prevalence found in all subgroups with ID was substantially higher (in all categories) than that in the general population.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 66%

Refractive errors and visual impairment in 900 adults with intellectual disabilities in the Netherlands

Splunder

Stilma

Bernsen

et al. 2003

ABSTRACT.Purpose: To collect data on refractive errors and visual impairment in adults with an intellectual disability (ID) in the Netherlands. Patients: A randomized sample of 2100 participants was drawn from a base population of 9000 adults with intellectual disabilities in the Netherlands. This article reports on the first 900 participants. Methods: All participants underwent a protocol-based on-site ophthalmological assessment carried out by skilled investigators. Results: Co-operation was classified according to the number of tests that could be carried out reliably and was good or excellent in 80% of subjects, average in 13% and poor in 7%. Refraction could be reliably assessed in 505/900 (56%) subjects. There was an increased risk of visual impairment in all subgroups compared to the general Dutch population. Visual acuity (VA) was related to the level of ID, but refractive errors were not. New spectacles were prescribed in 106 cases (12%). Of 374 people in whom both monocular VA and the refractive error of the right eye could be reliably assessed, 153 (41%) had a pretest prescription, 16 (10%) of which we found to be inadequate. Of the 221 participants without a pretest prescription, 41 (19%) benefited from correction. Only 38/84 (45%) subjects aged 50 years or older, who could benefit from correction for near vision, had near spectacles. New correction increased the mean distant VA significantly from 0.44 to 0.65 (p <0.0005). Conclusions: With some adaptations, visual screening is feasible in a majority of adults with ID. Visual impairment and refractive errors are much more prevalent in adults with ID than in the normal population. Accurate spectacle correction resulted in significant improvement in distant VA.

“…In a similar study from the other Nordic countries ) the most common diagnoses are the same, but in the Swedish material we have considerably higher prevalences of cerebral visual impairment and nonhereditary optic atrophy, as well as hypoplasia of the optic nerve, while the prevalence of retinopathy of prematurity was lower. From a general point of view, these four diagnoses in addition to malformations have been the predominant causes of visual impairment in a number of studies performed during the last decades (Skydsgaard 1955;Vannas & Raivio 1964;Lindstedt 1972Lindstedt , 1975Pearce 1975;Schappert-Kimmisjer 1975;Halldorsson & Bjornsson 1980;Hansen Peckham 1986;van der Pol 1986;Rosenberg 1987;Hansen et al 1992). …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Visual impairment in Swedish children

Blohmé

Törnqvist

1997

ABSTRACT.hrrpose: To gain an overview of the spectrum of diagnoses among Swedish visually impaired children. Methods: An epidemiological study of all known visually impaired children was made by review of medical records. Resultsandconclusion: In all we found 2373 children, 0-19 years of age, with an age-specific prevalence of 10.9/10 000. The two largest diagnostic groups included neuro-ophthalmological and retinal diseases. The most frequent disorders were cerebral visual impairment, non-hereditary optic atrophy, retinal dystrophy (when regarded as a general entity), congenital hypoplasia of the optic nerve and congenital cataract. Nystagmus secondary to brain disorder, albinism, congenital nystagmus, retinopathy of prematurity and high myopia were also found in a considerable number of patients. The leading diagnoses in children with WHO-defined childhood blindness were non-hereditary optic atrophy, cerebral visual impairment and retinopathy of prematurity. A large proportion of the children, especially in the groups with neuro-ophthalmological disorders and malformations of the posterior segment had additional impairments, emphasizing the importance of a multi-disciplinary approach when assessing multi-handicapped children.