PURPOSE: To assess the prevalence of presbyopia, spectacles use and spectacle correction coverage for near vision among weaving communities in Prakasam district in the South Indian state of Andhra Pradesh. METHODS: A population based cross sectional study was conducted among a population aged ≥40 years. Distance visual acuity was assessed at 6 m. Near vision was assessed using N notation charts at a fixed distance of 40 cm. Presbyopia was defined as binocular unaided near vision <N8 and improving to ≥N8 with near addition lenses. Functional presbyopia was defined as presenting near vision <N8 and improving to ≥N8 with near addition lenses. A questionnaire was used to collect information on spectacles use. In order to calculate spectacle correction coverage for presbyopia, met presbyopia need was defined as the percentage of people who presented with presbyopia correction and achieved binocular N8 using it. Unmet presbyopia need was defined as the percentage of people who had either under corrected or uncorrected binocular near vision worse than N8 that would improve with correction to at least N8. RESULTS: Of 2848/3000 enumerated subjects (94.0%) participated. Four hundred individuals with distance visual impairment were excluded from the analysis. Among the remaining 2448 individuals, 46% were male and 49.1% had no formal education. The mean age among males was higher compared to females (p < 0.01). Based on unaided near vision, the prevalence of presbyopia was 61.8% (95% CI: 59.9-63.7) and the prevalence of functional presbyopia was 35.1% (95% CI: 33.2-37.0). Using multivariable analysis, it was found that functional presbyopia was significantly associated with female gender, no education and lack of spectacle use. Spectacle correction coverage was 43.2%. Among the 781 individuals who had no correction at the time of examination, 122 (15.6%) subjects reported having used spectacles previously. The reasons for discontinuation of spectacles were discomfort with spectacles (n = 57; 46.7%), damaged or lost spectacles (n = 45; 36.9%), ability to see clearly even without spectacles (n = 12; 9.8%) and other reasons (n = 8; 6.6%). CONCLUSION: Although the prevalence of presbyopia (61.8%) was comparable with other studies, the prevalence of functional presbyopia (35.1%) was lower and linked with higher spectacle correction coverage (43.2%) in this weaving community. However, it still highlights a large unmet need and spectacle correction coverage that could be improved by the provision of good quality, affordable spectacles, which may also improve spectacles use.
PURPOSE: To assess the prevalence of presbyopia, spectacles use and spectacle correction coverage for near vision among weaving communities in Prakasam district in the South Indian state of Andhra Pradesh. METHODS: A population based cross sectional study was conducted among a population aged ≥40 years. Distance visual acuity was assessed at 6 m. Near vision was assessed using N notation charts at a fixed distance of 40 cm. Presbyopia was defined as binocular unaided near vision <N8 and improving to ≥N8 with near addition lenses. Functional presbyopia was defined as presenting near vision <N8 and improving to ≥N8 with near addition lenses. A questionnaire was used to collect information on spectacles use. In order to calculate spectacle correction coverage for presbyopia, met presbyopia need was defined as the percentage of people who presented with presbyopia correction and achieved binocular N8 using it. Unmet presbyopia need was defined as the percentage of people who had either under corrected or uncorrected binocular near vision worse than N8 that would improve with correction to at least N8. RESULTS: Of 2848/3000 enumerated subjects (94.0%) participated. Four hundred individuals with distance visual impairment were excluded from the analysis. Among the remaining 2448 individuals, 46% were male and 49.1% had no formal education. The mean age among males was higher compared to females (p < 0.01). Based on unaided near vision, the prevalence of presbyopia was 61.8% (95% CI: 59.9-63.7) and the prevalence of functional presbyopia was 35.1% (95% CI: 33.2-37.0). Using multivariable analysis, it was found that functional presbyopia was significantly associated with female gender, no education and lack of spectacle use. Spectacle correction coverage was 43.2%. Among the 781 individuals who had no correction at the time of examination, 122 (15.6%) subjects reported having used spectacles previously. The reasons for discontinuation of spectacles were discomfort with spectacles (n = 57; 46.7%), damaged or lost spectacles (n = 45; 36.9%), ability to see clearly even without spectacles (n = 12; 9.8%) and other reasons (n = 8; 6.6%). CONCLUSION: Although the prevalence of presbyopia (61.8%) was comparable with other studies, the prevalence of functional presbyopia (35.1%) was lower and linked with higher spectacle correction coverage (43.2%) in this weaving community. However, it still highlights a large unmet need and spectacle correction coverage that could be improved by the provision of good quality, affordable spectacles, which may also improve spectacles use.