L M Weih1, M Nanjan, C A McCarty, H R Taylor. 1. Centre for Eye Research Australia, Department of Ophthalmology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. leann@cera.unimelb.edu.au
Abstract
PURPOSE: To determine the prevalence and investigate predictors of open-angle glaucoma in Victoria, Australia. DESIGN: Two-site, population-based cross-sectional study. PARTICIPANTS: Permanent residents aged 40 years and older at recruitment from 1992 through 1996. METHODS: A cluster-stratified random sample of 4744 participants from two cohorts, urban and rural, participated. Participants completed a standardized interview regarding demographic, lifestyle, and medical characteristics and a dilated eye examination including measurement of intraocular pressure, visual fields, cup-to-disc ratios, and paired stereo photography of the optic discs. A consensus panel of six ophthalmologists determined glaucoma diagnosis. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Diagnosis of glaucoma (possible, probable, definite). RESULTS: The prevalence of possible glaucoma cases was 1.2% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.60, 1.7), of probable cases was 0.70% (95% CI, 0.39, 1.0), and of definite cases was 1.8% (95% CI, 1.4, 2.2). There was a significant increase in glaucoma prevalence with age across all definitions, but there was no difference in age-standardized rates between genders. A total of 60% of probable and definite glaucoma cases were undiagnosed before this study. Adjusted for age, the strongest risk factor for glaucoma was a positive family history of glaucoma (odds ratio, 3.1; 95% CI, 1.6, 5.3). Glaucoma patients who had not attended an eye care provider in the last 2 years were eight times (95% CI, 3.2, 20.4) more likely to have undiagnosed disease. CONCLUSIONS: These results support the importance of the genetic or familial basis of many glaucoma cases and highlight the need to develop appropriate techniques to screen for undiagnosed disease.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: To determine the prevalence and investigate predictors of open-angle glaucoma in Victoria, Australia. DESIGN: Two-site, population-based cross-sectional study. PARTICIPANTS: Permanent residents aged 40 years and older at recruitment from 1992 through 1996. METHODS: A cluster-stratified random sample of 4744 participants from two cohorts, urban and rural, participated. Participants completed a standardized interview regarding demographic, lifestyle, and medical characteristics and a dilated eye examination including measurement of intraocular pressure, visual fields, cup-to-disc ratios, and paired stereo photography of the optic discs. A consensus panel of six ophthalmologists determined glaucoma diagnosis. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Diagnosis of glaucoma (possible, probable, definite). RESULTS: The prevalence of possible glaucoma cases was 1.2% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.60, 1.7), of probable cases was 0.70% (95% CI, 0.39, 1.0), and of definite cases was 1.8% (95% CI, 1.4, 2.2). There was a significant increase in glaucoma prevalence with age across all definitions, but there was no difference in age-standardized rates between genders. A total of 60% of probable and definite glaucoma cases were undiagnosed before this study. Adjusted for age, the strongest risk factor for glaucoma was a positive family history of glaucoma (odds ratio, 3.1; 95% CI, 1.6, 5.3). Glaucomapatients who had not attended an eye care provider in the last 2 years were eight times (95% CI, 3.2, 20.4) more likely to have undiagnosed disease. CONCLUSIONS: These results support the importance of the genetic or familial basis of many glaucoma cases and highlight the need to develop appropriate techniques to screen for undiagnosed disease.
Authors: Jac Charlesworth; Patricia L Kramer; Tom Dyer; Victor Diego; John R Samples; Jamie E Craig; David A Mackey; Alex W Hewitt; John Blangero; Mary K Wirtz Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2010-03-17 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: Brian C Samuels; Nathan M Hammes; Philip L Johnson; Anantha Shekhar; Stuart J McKinnon; R Rand Allingham Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2012-10-23 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: Ronnie George; Hemamalini Arvind; M Baskaran; S Ve Ramesh; Prema Raju; Lingam Vijaya Journal: Indian J Ophthalmol Date: 2010 May-Jun Impact factor: 1.848