Susan Vitale1, Robert D Sperduto, Frederick L Ferris. 1. Division of Epidemiology and Clinical Applications, National Eye Institute, National Institutes of Health, 10 Center Dr, Room 10D45, Mail Stop 1863, Bethesda, MD 20892-1863, USA. sev@nei.nih.gov
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare US population prevalence estimates for myopia in 1971-1972 and 1999-2004. METHODS: The 1971-1972 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey provided the earliest nationally representative estimates for US myopia prevalence; myopia was diagnosed by an algorithm using either lensometry, pinhole visual acuity, and presenting visual acuity (for presenting visual acuity > or =20/40) or retinoscopy (for presenting visual acuity < or =20/50). Using a similar method for diagnosing myopia, we examined data from the 1999-2004 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey to determine whether myopia prevalence had changed during the 30 years between the 2 surveys. RESULTS: Using the 1971-1972 method, the estimated prevalence of myopia in persons aged 12 to 54 years was significantly higher in 1999-2004 than in 1971-1972 (41.6% vs 25.0%, respectively; P < .001). Prevalence estimates were higher in 1999-2004 than in 1971-1972 for black individuals (33.5% vs 13.0%, respectively; P < .001) and white individuals (43.0% vs 26.3%, respectively; P < .001) and for all levels of myopia severity (>-2.0 diopters [D]: 17.5% vs 13.4%, respectively [P < .001]; < or =-2.0 to >-7.9 D: 22.4% vs 11.4%, respectively [P < .001]; < or =-7.9 D: 1.6% vs 0.2%, respectively [P < .001]). CONCLUSIONS: When using similar methods for each period, the prevalence of myopia in the United States appears to be substantially higher in 1999-2004 than 30 years earlier. Identifying modifiable risk factors for myopia could lead to the development of cost-effective interventional strategies.
OBJECTIVE: To compare US population prevalence estimates for myopia in 1971-1972 and 1999-2004. METHODS: The 1971-1972 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey provided the earliest nationally representative estimates for US myopia prevalence; myopia was diagnosed by an algorithm using either lensometry, pinhole visual acuity, and presenting visual acuity (for presenting visual acuity > or =20/40) or retinoscopy (for presenting visual acuity < or =20/50). Using a similar method for diagnosing myopia, we examined data from the 1999-2004 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey to determine whether myopia prevalence had changed during the 30 years between the 2 surveys. RESULTS: Using the 1971-1972 method, the estimated prevalence of myopia in persons aged 12 to 54 years was significantly higher in 1999-2004 than in 1971-1972 (41.6% vs 25.0%, respectively; P < .001). Prevalence estimates were higher in 1999-2004 than in 1971-1972 for black individuals (33.5% vs 13.0%, respectively; P < .001) and white individuals (43.0% vs 26.3%, respectively; P < .001) and for all levels of myopia severity (>-2.0 diopters [D]: 17.5% vs 13.4%, respectively [P < .001]; < or =-2.0 to >-7.9 D: 22.4% vs 11.4%, respectively [P < .001]; < or =-7.9 D: 1.6% vs 0.2%, respectively [P < .001]). CONCLUSIONS: When using similar methods for each period, the prevalence of myopia in the United States appears to be substantially higher in 1999-2004 than 30 years earlier. Identifying modifiable risk factors for myopia could lead to the development of cost-effective interventional strategies.
Authors: Leslie Donovan; Padmaja Sankaridurg; Arthur Ho; Thomas Naduvilath; Earl L Smith; Brien A Holden Journal: Optom Vis Sci Date: 2012-01 Impact factor: 1.973
Authors: Karla Zadnik; Loraine T Sinnott; Susan A Cotter; Lisa A Jones-Jordan; Robert N Kleinstein; Ruth E Manny; J Daniel Twelker; Donald O Mutti Journal: JAMA Ophthalmol Date: 2015-06 Impact factor: 7.389
Authors: Cassie A Ludwig; Ryan A Shields; Tiffany A Chen; Matthew A Powers; D Wilkin Parke; Andrew A Moshfeghi; Darius M Moshfeghi Journal: Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol Date: 2018-07-20 Impact factor: 3.117