Literature DB >> 26600605

Towards better estimates of uncorrected presbyopia.

Brien A Holden1, Nina Tahhan2, Monica Jong2, David A Wilson2, Timothy R Fricke2, Rupert Bourne3, Serge Resnikoff2.   

Abstract

Entities:  

Year:  2015        PMID: 26600605      PMCID: PMC4645442          DOI: 10.2471/BLT.15.156844

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Bull World Health Organ        ISSN: 0042-9686            Impact factor:   9.408


× No keyword cloud information.
Normal vision depends upon the ability of the ocular lens to change shape, ensuring that light is focused on the most sensitive part of the retina. Anyone living beyond middle age is inevitably affected by presbyopia, an inability to focus on near objects, due to the loss of flexibility of the ocular lens. It is estimated that over half of the one billion people affected globally cannot afford the spectacles needed to correct their eyesight. Most of the people with uncorrected visual impairment live in low- and middle-income countries., In 2002, the World Health Organization (WHO) estimated that more than 161 million people had visual impairment and that cataract was the leading cause. However, at that time, vision impairment that could be prevented “with use of the best possible optical correction” was excluded from the category H54 (visual impairment including blindness) in WHO’s International statistical classification of diseases and related health problems (ICD). Various groups with expertise on vision impairment argued that this definition was meaningless if no optical correction were available. Revised estimates of the number of people with vision impairment, including uncorrected refractive error, were published in 2004, 2010 and 2013.– Unfortunately, even in these revised estimates, impairment of near vision was not included due to insufficient data on the prevalence of the condition. Research that has specifically set out to investigate the prevalence and impact of uncorrected refractive error has often only considered impairment of distance vision. Among people who would benefit from the use of spectacles, it is estimated that 108 million people worldwide have impaired distance vision, while nearly five times as many (517 million people) have impaired near vision. Near vision is often perceived to be less problematic than impaired distance vision, particularly for people in low- and middle-income countries. It could be argued that reduced literacy, differences in vocation and lower life expectancy reduce the need for near vision correction – but recent studies indicate the contrary. Studies in rural Africa have shown that near vision impairment greatly impacts quality of life despite very low literacy levels. In these settings, spectacles have been found to be essential for a range of activities including sorting grains, weeding, cooking, sewing and caring for children. Illiterate participants provided with spectacles were found to be just as likely to recommend spectacles as literate participants. Impairment of near vision is at least as detrimental to quality of life as impairment of distance vision, regardless of the setting, sociodemographics or lifestyle of participants. Uncorrected presbyopia is the most common cause of visual impairment. WHO has recommended the measurement of near vision in population-based surveys. Formal inclusion of near vision impairment in the ICD is an overdue and crucial step in dealing effectively with this common but easily mitigated disability.
  11 in total

1.  Impact of presbyopia on quality of life in a rural African setting.

Authors:  Ilesh Patel; Beatriz Munoz; Andrew G Burke; Andrew Kayongoya; Wilson McHiwa; Alison W Schwarzwalder; Sheila K West
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  2006-05       Impact factor: 12.079

2.  Uncorrected refractive error: the major and most easily avoidable cause of vision loss.

Authors: 
Journal:  Community Eye Health       Date:  2007-09

3.  Blindness and poverty: a tragic combination.

Authors:  Brien A Holden
Journal:  Clin Exp Optom       Date:  2007-11       Impact factor: 2.742

4.  Global magnitude of visual impairment caused by uncorrected refractive errors in 2004.

Authors:  Serge Resnikoff; Donatella Pascolini; Silvio P Mariotti; Gopal P Pokharel
Journal:  Bull World Health Organ       Date:  2008-01       Impact factor: 9.408

5.  Potential lost productivity resulting from the global burden of uncorrected refractive error.

Authors:  T S T Smith; K D Frick; B A Holden; T R Fricke; K S Naidoo
Journal:  Bull World Health Organ       Date:  2009-06       Impact factor: 9.408

Review 6.  Global estimates of visual impairment: 2010.

Authors:  Donatella Pascolini; Silvio Paolo Mariotti
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  2011-12-01       Impact factor: 4.638

7.  Global data on visual impairment in the year 2002.

Authors:  Serge Resnikoff; Donatella Pascolini; Daniel Etya'ale; Ivo Kocur; Ramachandra Pararajasegaram; Gopal P Pokharel; Silvio P Mariotti
Journal:  Bull World Health Organ       Date:  2004-12-14       Impact factor: 9.408

Review 8.  Causes of vision loss worldwide, 1990-2010: a systematic analysis.

Authors:  Rupert R A Bourne; Gretchen A Stevens; Richard A White; Jennifer L Smith; Seth R Flaxman; Holly Price; Jost B Jonas; Jill Keeffe; Janet Leasher; Kovin Naidoo; Konrad Pesudovs; Serge Resnikoff; Hugh R Taylor
Journal:  Lancet Glob Health       Date:  2013-11-11       Impact factor: 26.763

9.  Utility and uncorrected refractive error.

Authors:  Nina Tahhan; Eric Papas; Timothy R Fricke; Kevin D Frick; Brien A Holden
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  2013-05-09       Impact factor: 12.079

10.  Global vision impairment due to uncorrected presbyopia.

Authors:  Brien A Holden; Timothy R Fricke; S May Ho; Reg Wong; Gerhard Schlenther; Sonja Cronjé; Anthea Burnett; Eric Papas; Kovin S Naidoo; Kevin D Frick
Journal:  Arch Ophthalmol       Date:  2008-12
View more
  5 in total

1.  Near vision spectacle coverage and barriers to near vision correction among adults in the Cape Coast Metropolis of Ghana.

Authors:  Michael Ntodie; Sampson L Abu; Samuel Kyei; Samuel Abokyi; Emmanuel K Abu
Journal:  Afr Health Sci       Date:  2017-06       Impact factor: 0.927

2.  Do You See What Eye See? Measurement, Correlates, and Functional Associations of Objective and Self-Reported Vision Impairment in Aging South Africans.

Authors:  Meagan T Farrell; Yusheng Jia; Lisa F Berkman; Ryan G Wagner
Journal:  J Aging Health       Date:  2021-05-24

3.  Assistive products and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

Authors:  Emma Tebbutt; Rebecca Brodmann; Johan Borg; Malcolm MacLachlan; Chapal Khasnabis; Robert Horvath
Journal:  Global Health       Date:  2016-11-29       Impact factor: 4.185

4.  Optimization of the Light Sword Lens for Presbyopia Correction.

Authors:  Walter Torres-Sepúlveda; Alejandro Mira-Agudelo; John Fredy Barrera-Ramírez; Krzysztof Petelczyc; Andrzej Kolodziejczyk
Journal:  Transl Vis Sci Technol       Date:  2020-02-12       Impact factor: 3.283

Review 5.  PresbyLASIK: A review of PresbyMAX, Supracor, and laser blended vision: Principles, planning, and outcomes.

Authors:  Rohit Shetty; Sheetal Brar; Mohita Sharma; Zelda Dadachanji; Vaitheeswaran Ganesan Lalgudi
Journal:  Indian J Ophthalmol       Date:  2020-12       Impact factor: 1.848

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.