Pradeep Y Ramulu1, Chad Hochberg, Eugenio A Maul, Emilie S Chan, Luigi Ferrucci, David S Friedman. 1. *MD, PhD †BS ‡MS Wilmer Eye Institute, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland (PYR, CH, EAM, ESC, DSF); and Longitudinal Studies Section, Clinical Research Branch, National Institute on Aging, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland (LF).
Abstract
PURPOSE: To determine the association between glaucoma and travel away from home. METHODS: Fifty-nine glaucoma suspect controls with normal vision and 80 glaucoma subjects with bilateral visual field (VF) loss wore a cellular tracking device during 1 week of normal activity. Location data were used to evaluate the number of daily excursions away from home as well as daily time spent away from home. RESULTS: Control and glaucoma subjects were similar in age, race, sex, employment, driving support, cognitive ability, mood, and comorbid illness (p > 0.1 for all). Better-eye VF mean deviation (MD) averaged 0.0 decibels (dB) in controls and -11.1 dB in glaucoma subjects. In multivariable models, glaucoma was associated with fewer daily excursions (β = -0.20; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], -0.38 to -0.02) and a greater likelihood of not leaving home on a given day (odds ratio [OR], 1.82; 95% CI, 1.05 to 3.06). Each 5-dB decrement in the better-eye VF MD was associated with fewer daily excursions (β = -0.06; 95% CI, -0.11 to -0.01) and a greater chance of not leaving home on a given day (OR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.04 to 1.47). Time spent away from home did not significantly differ between the glaucoma subjects and suspects (p = 0.18). However, each 5-dB decrement in the better-eye MD was associated with 6% less time away (95% CI, -12 to -1%). CONCLUSIONS: Individuals with glaucoma, particularly those with greater VF loss, are more home bound and travel away from home less than individuals with normal vision. Because being confined to the home environment may have detrimental effects on fitness and health, individuals with glaucoma should be considered for interventions such as orientation and mobility training to encourage safe travel away from home.
PURPOSE: To determine the association between glaucoma and travel away from home. METHODS: Fifty-nine glaucoma suspect controls with normal vision and 80 glaucoma subjects with bilateral visual field (VF) loss wore a cellular tracking device during 1 week of normal activity. Location data were used to evaluate the number of daily excursions away from home as well as daily time spent away from home. RESULTS: Control and glaucoma subjects were similar in age, race, sex, employment, driving support, cognitive ability, mood, and comorbid illness (p > 0.1 for all). Better-eye VF mean deviation (MD) averaged 0.0 decibels (dB) in controls and -11.1 dB in glaucoma subjects. In multivariable models, glaucoma was associated with fewer daily excursions (β = -0.20; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], -0.38 to -0.02) and a greater likelihood of not leaving home on a given day (odds ratio [OR], 1.82; 95% CI, 1.05 to 3.06). Each 5-dB decrement in the better-eye VF MD was associated with fewer daily excursions (β = -0.06; 95% CI, -0.11 to -0.01) and a greater chance of not leaving home on a given day (OR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.04 to 1.47). Time spent away from home did not significantly differ between the glaucoma subjects and suspects (p = 0.18). However, each 5-dB decrement in the better-eye MD was associated with 6% less time away (95% CI, -12 to -1%). CONCLUSIONS: Individuals with glaucoma, particularly those with greater VF loss, are more home bound and travel away from home less than individuals with normal vision. Because being confined to the home environment may have detrimental effects on fitness and health, individuals with glaucoma should be considered for interventions such as orientation and mobility training to encourage safe travel away from home.
Authors: Karun S Arora; Michael V Boland; David S Friedman; Joan L Jefferys; Sheila K West; Pradeep Y Ramulu Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 2013-08-30 Impact factor: 12.079
Authors: Noor Shabana; Valérie Cornilleau-Pérès; Jacques Droulez; James C H Goh; Grace S M Lee; Paul T K Chew Journal: Clin Exp Ophthalmol Date: 2005-06 Impact factor: 4.207
Authors: Kathleen A Turano; Aimee T Broman; Karen Bandeen-Roche; Beatriz Munoz; Gary S Rubin; Shelia West Journal: Optom Vis Sci Date: 2004-05 Impact factor: 1.973
Authors: Andrea V Yonge; Bonnielin K Swenor; Rhonda Miller; Victoria Goldhammer; Sheila K West; David S Friedman; Laura N Gitlin; Pradeep Y Ramulu Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 2016-12-22 Impact factor: 12.079
Authors: Pradeep Y Ramulu; Aleksandra Mihailovic; Sheila K West; Laura N Gitlin; David S Friedman Journal: Am J Ophthalmol Date: 2019-01-09 Impact factor: 5.258
Authors: Moon Jeong Lee; Jiangxia Wang; David S Friedman; Michael V Boland; Carlos G De Moraes; Pradeep Y Ramulu Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 2018-10-10 Impact factor: 12.079
Authors: Jithin Yohannan; Jiangxia Wang; Jamie Brown; Balwantray C Chauhan; Michael V Boland; David S Friedman; Pradeep Y Ramulu Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 2017-07-01 Impact factor: 12.079
Authors: Jian-Yu E; Jennifer A Schrack; Aleksandra Mihailovic; Amal A Wanigatunga; Sheila K West; David S Friedman; Laura N Gitlin; Tianjing Li; Pradeep Y Ramulu Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 2020-06-29 Impact factor: 12.079
Authors: Dominic J Grisafe; Rohit Varma; Bruce S Burkemper; Benjamin Y Xu; Mina Torres; Alicia Fairbrother-Crisp; Cecilia M Patino; Roberta McKean-Cowdin Journal: Am J Ophthalmol Date: 2021-02-08 Impact factor: 5.488
Authors: Angeline M Nguyen; Karun S Arora; Bonnielin K Swenor; David S Friedman; Pradeep Y Ramulu Journal: BMC Geriatr Date: 2015-06-12 Impact factor: 3.921