Prevalence of Eye Conditions, Utilization of Eye Health Care Services, and Ophthalmic Medications After Entering Residential Aged Care in Australia

Abstract

Purpose This study aims to evaluate the burden and trends of eye diseases, utilisation of eye health care services, and ophthalmic medications among older people living in residential aged care facilities in Australia. Methods A cross-sectional study was conducted using data from the Registry of Senior Australians. Individuals aged ≥65 years who entered permanent residential aged care facilities between 2008 and 2015 were included. The prevalence (95% confidence interval [CI]) of eye diseases by year, eye health care services, and ophthalmic medication use within a year of entry into the service were evaluated. Poisson regression models estimated adjusted rate of change using prevalence ratio (PR) by age, sex, state, and frailty scores. Results Of the 409,186 people studied, 43.6% ( N = 178,367) had an eye condition. Of the total cohort, 32.9% ( N = 134,566) had chronic eye conditions and 19.7% ( N = 80,661) had an acute eye condition. Common chronic eye conditions were glaucoma (13.6%, N = 55,830), cataract (8%, ( N = 32,779), blindness (4.5%, N = 18,856), and poor vision (10.3%, N = 42,245). Prevalence of any eye condition (2008: 42.7%, 95% CI = 42.2%–43.2% and 2015: 41.2%, 95% CI = 40.8–41.6%, PR = 0.99, 95% CI = 0.99–0.99, P < 0.001), acute eye conditions (2008: 19.8%, 95% CI = 19.4%–20.2% and 2015: 17.4%, 95% CI = 17.1%–17.6%, PR = 0.97, 95% CI = 0.97–0.98, P < 0.001), and blindness (2008: 5.2%, 95% CI = 5.0%–5.4% and 2015: 3.7%, 95% CI = 3.5%–3.9%, PR = 0.93, 95% CI = 0.93–0.94, p < 0.001). decreased over the study period. The prevalence of glaucoma (2008: 13.5%, 95% CI = 13.2%–13.8% and 2015: 13.8%, 95% CI = 13.5%–13.7%; PR = 1.01, 95% CI = 0.99–1.10, P < 0.001) and cataract (2008: 7.4%, 95% CI = 7.2%–7.7% and 2015: 8.5%, 95% CI = 8.3%–8.7%, PR = 1.00, 95% CI = 1.00–1.01, P < 0.001) remained stable or slightly increased. Overall, 46.4% ( N = 82,769) of individuals with eye conditions, accessed at least one eye health service within the first year of entering residential care and 70.5% ( N = 125,673) used at least one ophthalmic medication. Optometric services (41.7%, N = 74,358) were the most used eye health care services and anti-infective eye drops (37.2%, N = 66,331) were the most commonly dispensed medications. Conclusions The prevalence of blindness among older Australian using residential aged care services decreased over the study period. However, the burden of eye diseases remained high between 2008 and 2015, whereas the use of eye health care services was disproportionat...

Relationship between Eye Frailty and Physical, Social, and Psychological/Cognitive Weaknesses among Community-Dwelling Older Adults in Japan

“…There are no previous reports on the prevalence of eye frailty; however, a systematic review by Bourne et al [ 24 ] in 2017 suggests that approximately 60% of older adults over the age of 70 had visual impairment. Nevertheless, the rate of eye examinations among older adults has been reported to be low [ 25 ], suggesting that many older adults are living with age-related visual impairment that is overlooked.…”

Registry of Senior Australians (ROSA): integrating cross-sectoral information to evaluate quality and safety of care provided to older people

“…The majority of the ROSA team’s research has focused on national priority areas of high burden affecting older people in the aged care sector, including dementia, service accessibility, quality and safety of care, falls and injuries and quality use of medicines 9 18 20 21 32 34 36 39 43. Additionally, the ROSA platform has been used to examine the experience of individuals with highly prevalent and often understudied conditions in older people in these settings, for example, eye44 and mental health 17. The ROSA platform has also allowed for the examination of aspects of services (eg, built environment)45 and new technology (eg, mobile radiological services)46 that can affect older people’s health and quality of care received in this setting.…”