Prevalence, associations and characteristics of severe uncorrected refractive error in the Australian National Eye Health Survey

Keel, Stuart; McGuinness, Myra B; Foreman, Joshua; Scheetz, Jane; Taylor, Hugh R.; Dirani, Mohamed

doi:10.1111/ceo.13647

Cited by 3 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“… 15 16 17 While, female patients were more susceptible to URE in some studies, 15 18 others have reported the opposite. 19 20 21 Lower education, lack of insurance, and low income have also been related to URE. 17 18 21 Type of refractive error and diabetes are among the diseases that have been associated with URE.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Risk Factors for Uncorrected Refractive Error

Soleimani

Saberzadeh-Ardestani

Hakimi

et al. 2022

Journal of Current Ophthalmology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: To determine the prevalence of visually significant uncorrected refractive error (URE) in Rafsanjan and investigate the related factors. URE is the leading cause of visual impairment (VI) which causes the second-highest number of years lived with disability. The URE is a preventable health problem. Methods: In this cross-sectional study participants from Rafsanjan who were 35–70 years were enrolled between 2014 and 2020. Demographic and clinical characteristics data were gathered, and eye examination was performed. Visually significant URE was defined as present if habitual visual acuity was (HVA; visual acuity with present optical correction) >0.3 logMAR in the best eye and the visual acuity of that eye showed >0.2 logMAR improvement after the best correction. Logistic regression was used to determine the association between predicting variables (age, sex, wealth, education, employment, diabetes, cataract, and refractive error characteristics) and outcome (URE). Results: Among the 6991 participants of Rafsanjan subcohort of the Persian Eye Cohort, 311 (4.4%) had a visually significant URE. Diabetes was significantly more prevalent in the participants with visually significant URE, at 18.7% versus 13.1% in patients without significant URE (P = 0.004). In the final model, each year of increase in age was associated with 3% higher URE (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.01–1.05). In comparison to low hyperopia, participants with low myopia had 5.17 times more odds of visually significant URE (95% CI: 3.38–7.93). However, antimetropia decreased the risk of visually significant URE (95% CI: 0.02–0.37). Conclusion: Policymakers should pay special attention to elderly patients with myopia to effectively reduce the prevalence of visually significant URE.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Risk Factors for Uncorrected Refractive Error

Soleimani

Saberzadeh-Ardestani

Hakimi

et al. 2022

Journal of Current Ophthalmology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Associated risk factors were older age (OR 3.59), habitation in outer regional areas (OR 1.78) and lack of an eye examination in the previous 2 years (OR 1.5) for the Indigenous group. In the non‐Indigenous group, these risk factors were older age (OR 1.51), habitation in outer regional areas (OR 0.68 for inner regional) and male gender (OR 1.30) . The comparison of risk factors alerts us to several interesting findings involving demographics, age and modifiable risk factors.…”

mentioning

confidence: 97%

“…In the current issue of the journal, Keel et al have extended their analysis to establish risk factors associated with severe uncorrected refractive error that may underpin the previously reported vision loss and blindness . In the included paper, they examined 1738 Indigenous Australians aged 40 to 92 years and 3098 non‐Indigenous Australians aged 50 to 98.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the included paper, they examined 1738 Indigenous Australians aged 40 to 92 years and 3098 non‐Indigenous Australians aged 50 to 98. They reported the prevalence of severe uncorrected refractive error in the NEHS at 11.0% in the non‐Indigenous group and 14.5% in the Indigenous study group . Severe uncorrected refractive error was defined as an improvement of ≥2 lines on the logMAR chart in one or both eyes in participants with a presenting visual acuity of <6/12.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The majority of these are likely individuals who present with some level of nuclear cataract. Confidence in this assertion arises from the reported prevalence of any cataract at 24% in non‐Indigenous and 33% in Indigenous participants . It would be interesting to undertake a longitudinal study as part of the NEHS to investigate the slow progression of nuclear cataracts over time in the older age group.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Uncorrected refractive error in the Australian National Eye Health Survey

Baird

Jonas

2020

Clinical Exper Ophthalmology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Self‐rated eyesight among healthy older Australians: Baseline results of the ASPREE Longitudinal Study of Older Persons

McGuinness

Robman

McNeil

et al. 2023

Clinical Exper Ophthalmology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background We aimed to describe the self‐reported level of eyesight amongst a cohort of relatively healthy older Australian adults, and to investigate associations between poorer self‐rated eyesight and demographic, health, and functional characteristics Methods The ASPirin in Reducing Events in the Elderly (ASPREE) Longitudinal Study of Older Persons (ALSOP) study was embedded in a multisite trial which recruited independently living Australians from general practices (2010–2014). Self‐rated eyesight was recorded on a paper‐based questionnaire as Excellent, Good, Fair, Poor, Very poor, or Completely blind at the baseline study wave Results Data from 14 592 participants (aged 70–95 years, 54.61% female) were included in this cross‐sectional analysis. Eighty percent of participants reported excellent or good eyesight (n = 11 677). People with complete blindness were precluded from enrolling but 299 participants (2.0%) reported poor or very poor eyesight, and 2616 rated their eyesight as fair (17.9%). Lower levels of eyesight were associated with being older, female, fewer years of formal education, a primary language other than English, smoking, and self‐reported macular degeneration, glaucoma, retinopathy, cataracts, and hearing problems (each p ≤ 0.021). People with lower levels of eyesight had a higher number of falls, frailty characteristics, and depressive symptoms, and lower mental and physical health functioning scores (each p < 0.001) Conclusions Whilst most of these healthy older Australians reported good or excellent eyesight, a notable minority reported poor or very poor eyesight, and this was associated with a range of poorer health measures. These findings support the need for additional resources to prevent vision loss and associated sequelae

show abstract

Prevalence, associations and characteristics of severe uncorrected refractive error in the Australian National Eye Health Survey

Cited by 3 publications

References 36 publications

Risk Factors for Uncorrected Refractive Error

Risk Factors for Uncorrected Refractive Error

Uncorrected refractive error in the Australian National Eye Health Survey

Self‐rated eyesight among healthy older Australians: Baseline results of the ASPREE Longitudinal Study of Older Persons

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About