Literature DB >> 27239576

The prevalence of refractive errors in 6- to 15-year-old schoolchildren in Dezful, Iran.

Reza Norouzirad1, Hassan Hashemi2, Abbasali Yekta3, Fereidon Nirouzad1, Hadi Ostadimoghaddam4, Negareh Yazdani3, Nooshin Dadbin5, Ali Javaherforoushzadeh5, Mehdi Khabazkhoob6.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To determine the prevalence of refractive errors, among 6- to 15-year-old schoolchildren in the city of Dezful in western Iran.
METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, 1375 Dezful schoolchildren were selected through multistage cluster sampling. After obtaining written consent, participants had uncorrected and corrected visual acuity tests and cycloplegic refraction at the school site. Refractive errors were defined as myopia [spherical equivalent (SE) -0.5 diopter (D)], hyperopia (SE ≥ 2.0D), and astigmatism (cylinder error > 0.5D).
RESULTS: 1151 (83.7%) schoolchildren participated in the study. Of these, 1130 completed their examinations. 21 individuals were excluded because of poor cooperation and contraindication for cycloplegic refraction. Prevalence of myopia, hyperopia, and astigmatism were 14.9% (95% confidence interval (CI): 10.1-19.6), 12.9% (95% CI: 7.2-18.6), and 45.3% (95% CI: 40.3-50.3), respectively. Multiple logistic regression analysis showed an age-related increase in myopia prevalence (p << 0.001) and a decrease in hyperopia prevalence (p << 0.001). There was a higher prevalence of myopia in boys (p<<0.001) and hyperopia in girls (p = 0.007).
CONCLUSION: This study showed a considerably high prevalence of refractive errors among the Iranian population of schoolchildren in Dezful in the west of Iran. The prevalence of myopia is considerably high compared to previous studies in Iran and increases with age.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Children; Epidemiology; Middle-east; Refractive errors

Year:  2015        PMID: 27239576      PMCID: PMC4877718          DOI: 10.1016/j.joco.2015.09.008

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Curr Ophthalmol        ISSN: 2452-2325


Introduction

With over 280 million visually impaired and 39 million blind, visual impairment is a major health issue that imposes a great burden to all nations globally. The leading causes of visual impairment are refractive errors and cataracts, which have been the focus of many studies since 1990.1, 2 Nonetheless, recent studies still stress the magnitude of the problem with these two visual disorders because they affect the elderly as well as the young and children. Studies around the world indicate that refractive errors are common in all ages.3, 4, 5 A look at these studies shows that over 40% of children and schoolchildren in eastern Asian countries are affected with refractive errors.6, 7, 8 Refractive errors have received much attention globally over the past decade, and studies have been able to answer many questions about these problems. Iran is the second most populous country in the Middle East. Many studies have discussed these problems in Iran in the past decade.3, 9, 10, 11, 12 According to these studies, hyperopia is the most common refractive disorder in Iranian children. Although many studies have been conducted about the prevalence of refractive errors in Iranian schoolchildren, the results of these studies are inconsistent.3, 9, 10, 11, 12 In order to achieve a common result about the prevalence of hyperopia and myopia in Iranian students, further studies should be done using refractive error study in children (RESC) protocol across the country. Therefore, in the current study the prevalence of refractive errors has been studied using RESC protocol among the population of schoolchildren in Iran.

Materials and methods

This study was performed cross-sectionally between November 2013 and January 2014. The target population of the study was schoolchildren of the city of Dezful who were selected through multistage cluster sampling. There are 271 schools with 50177 students in Dezful. Twenty-four schools were selected as clusters in this study. In each school, using a simple random method, a number of students were selected from each class proportionate to the number of students in that school. After sample selection, the project was explained to their parents to invite them to participate, and consenting invitees were enrolled in the study. A suitable space was selected on the school site one day before the study. In each school, examinations were started with first graders, and students in each class were examined in alphabetical order.

Examinations

After the interview, students were guided into the examination room to have non-cycloplegic auto-refraction with the Topcon RM8800 autorefractor (Topcon Corporation, Japan) by a single skilled technician. Then students had their visual acuity tested with their present spectacles, if any, using a Snellen tumbling E chart distanced at 6.0 m from the examinee. For these students, lensometry was done with the Topcon LM 800 lensometer (Topcon Corporation, Japan), the results of which were recorded along with the date they received the prescription. Next, uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA) was tested for all participants, and auto-refractor results were refined through retinoscopy (HEINE BETA, Heine Optotechnik, Germany) and trial lenses (MSD, Italy). Finally, 2 drops of Cyclopentolate (1%) (Alcon Cusi El Masnou-Barcelona, Spain) were instilled 40 and 35 min before refraction.

Definition

Definitions – To provide grounds for accurate and valid comparisons with other studies using the RESC protocol,3, 5, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15 we set spherical equivalent based on cycloplegic refraction cut-points of −0.50 diopter (D) for myopia and +2.0 D for hyperopia. Astigmatism was defined as a cylinder error >0.5 D.3, 5, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15 We categorized myopia as mild (−0.5 D to −3.0 D), moderate (−3.1 D to −6.0 D), and high (worse than −6.0 D). Hyperopia was categorized as mild (+2.0 D to +3.0 D), moderate (+2.1 D to +4.0 D), and high (>+4.0 D). Astigmatism axis was classified as with-the-rule (WTR) if the axis was between 150° and 180° or between 0° and 30°, against-the-rule (ATR) if the axis was between 60° and 102°, and others were considered oblique astigmatism. Cycloplegia was not induced in children with a history of epilepsy, cardiovascular disease, or cerebrovascular disease; these cases were excluded from the study. Another exclusion criterion was parents׳ non-consent.

Statistical analysis

Here we present the prevalence of refractive errors in percentages and 95% confidence intervals. The effect of cluster sampling was taken into account in calculating standard errors. Logistic regression was used to examine relationships of refractive errors with other studied factors, and odds ratios were calculated. To control for confounding factors, multiple logistic regression was used. A significance level of 95% was considered, and any P value less than 5% was reported significant.

Ethical issues

The Ethics Committee of Dezful University of Medical Sciences approved the study protocol, which was conducted in accord with the tenets of the Helsinki Declaration.

Results

In this study, 1375 schoolchildren were selected through cluster sampling, and 1151 (83.7%) of them participated. We excluded 21 individuals because of poor cooperation and contraindication for cycloplegic refraction. Refractive errors examinations were completed for 1130 children, whose data was used in the analyses. The mean age of the participants was 11.05 ± 2.93 (range: 6–15) years, and 520 (46.0%) were female. Mean spherical equivalent based on cycloplegic refraction was 0.47 ± 1.08 (range: -5.56 to 13.39) D. The prevalence of eyeglass wear was 6.02% [95% confidence interval (CI): 4.63–7.41]. Table 1 summarizes the prevalence of different types of refractive errors by age and gender. The overall prevalence of myopia was 14.9% (95% CI: 10.1–19.6); 17.0% and 12.3% in boys and girls, respectively. Logistic regression showed higher odds of myopia in boys (p < 0.001). Also, as shown in Table 1, the prevalence of myopia increased with age from 7.1% in the 6- to 7-year-old age group to 22.6% in the 14- to 15-year-age group (p < 0.001). Based on results of the multiple logistic regression model (Table 2), myopia prevalence directly correlated with older age (p < 0.001) and male gender (p < 0.001). Hyperopia was detected in 12.9% (95% CI: 7.2–18.6) of the studied students, and as demonstrated in Table 1, the prevalence was significantly higher in girls (p < 0.001) and significantly decreased with age (p < 0.001). Multiple logistic regression identified female gender (p = 0.007) and younger age (p < 0.001) as risk factors related to hyperopia. Of the participants with myopia, 74.3% had mild myopia, 16.7% had moderate myopia, and 9% had severe myopia. Mild, moderate, and severe hyperopia was seen in 84.4%, 10.5%, and 5.1% of the hyperopic participants, respectively. As demonstrated in Table 1, the prevalence of astigmatism was significantly higher in boys (p = 0.033), but age-related changes in astigmatism were not statistically significant (p = 0.861). Results of the multiple model showed that only the male gender (p = 0.032) statistically significantly correlated with the prevalence of astigmatism. In the studied sample, 24.2% and 17.5% had with-the-rule and against-the-rule astigmatism, respectively, and the prevalence of oblique astigmatism was 3.5%.
Table 1

The prevalence of myopia, hyperopia, and astigmatism in schoolchildren of Dezful by age and gender.

Myopia% (95%CI)Hyperopia% (95%CI)Astigmatism (>0.5D) % (95%CI)Astigmatism (>1D) % (95%CI)Astigmatism (>2D) % (95%CI)
Total14.9(10.1–19.6)12.9(7.2–18.6)45.3(40.3–50.3)12.6(10.2–14.9)3.2(1.9–4.4)
GenderFemale12.3(7.8–16.9)15.4(8.2–22.6)41.5(34.8–48.3)10.0(5.4–14.6)2.3(1.1–3.5)
Male17.0(12.0–22.1)10.8(6.2–15.4)48.5(43.1–53.9)14.8(8.9–20.6)3.9(1–6.9)
Age (years)6–77.1(6.7–7.6)25.0(17.5–32.5)47.3(42.6–52)12.5(11.7–13.3)3.6(0.3–6.8)
8–98.0(2.5–18.5)18.0(9.6–26.4)38.0(9.9–66.1)12.0(0.4–24.4)2.0(0.3–6.3)
10–1111.8(9.6–13.9)12.7(9.8–15.7)52.0(48.8–55.1)13.7(9.1–18.4)2.9(1–4.9)
12–1317.7(15.9–19.4)9.1(6.4–11.9)43.3(34.3–52.3)11.6(8–15.1)2.4(2.3–2.5)
14–1522.6(20–25.3)5.8(5.5–6.2)43.8(38.6–49)13.1(7.4–18.9)4.4(1.6–7.1)

CI: confidence interval.

D: diopter.

Table 2

The association between myopia, hyperopia, and astigmatism with age and gender in multiple logistic regression.

VariablesOR (95%CI)p-value
MyopiaAge (year)1.19 (1.13–1.26)<0.001
Gender (male/female)1.49 (1.29–1.72)<0.001
HyperopiaAge (year)0.81 (0.78–0.85)<0.001
Gender (male/female)0.65 (0.5–0.86)0.007
AstigmatismAge (year)0.99 (0.94–1.05)0.843
Gender (male/female)1.33 (1.03–1.71)0.032

OR: odds ratio.

CI: confidence interval.

The results of our study showed that the uncorrected Visual Acuity was 0.05 ± 0.16 LogMar in all individuals. The findings of this study represented the uncorrected Visual Acuity as the lowest in myopic individuals and the highest in emmetropic participants. It was 0.02 ± 0.07, 0.51 ± 0.25 and 0.20 ± 0.31 LogMar in emmetropic, myopic, and hyperopic individuals, respectively (P < 0.001). The uncorrected Visual Acuity was 0.23 ± 0.25 and 0.03 ± 0.12 LogMar in astigmatic and non-astigmatic individuals, respectively (p < 0.001).

Discussion

Visual disorders in children and schoolchildren have been discussed in several studies in recent years in Iran and the rest of the world.7, 9, 11, 12, 17, 18, 19, 20 However, conclusive results require further studies in this area. In this study, we demonstrated the prevalence of refractive errors, in schoolchildren in Dezful in western Iran. As presented, 14.9% of the studied schoolchildren were myopic, and myopia prevalence increased from 7.1% in the 6- to 7-year-old age group to 22.6% in the 14- to 15-year-old age group. This observation was not unexpected; many studies have demonstrated a correlation between age and myopia in the second decade of life.13, 14, 21 The most important cause of this increase in this age group is the growth-related increase in axial length (AL). Increased AL during the first and second decades of life has been documented in cross-sectional and prospective studies. As for the higher myopia prevalence in boys compared to girls, our finding is in line with previous studies; while few studies have shown this relation in school-age children, most studies in older age groups agree that the prevalence of myopia is higher in males.4, 5, 6, 7, 10, 11, 20, 21, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28 This can again be explained by longer AL in males. Of note, however, was the high prevalence of myopia in this study compared to previous studies in Iran.3, 10, 12 According to the summary of previous studies presented in Table 3, the rate of myopia previously reported in this age group was 2.4%–4.4%. Even in Dezful, the reported rate in this age group in 2004 was 3.4%.
Table 3

Summary of similar previous studies on the prevalence of refractive errors.

CountryYear of publicationAge (year)Sample sizeMyopiaHyperopiaAstigmatism
China3020106–15307013.75%3.26%3.75%
Morocco520096–165456.1%18.3%23.5%
India3120027–1540744.1%0.78%OD = 2.6%
Poland2320076–18572413%38%4%
Malaysia2520086–127055.4%1.0%0.6%
Chile1320005–1553035.8%14.5%27%
China32200811.4–17.1189262.3%0.28%1.7%
Ethiopia2820137–1842386.0%0.33%
Laos3320126–1128240.8%2.8%
Cambodia27201212–1455272.2%0.4%2.0%
Nepal1820125–1513334%15%47%
Nepal3420107–1544059.8%31.0%
Mexico35200312–13103544%6.0%9.5%
Tunisia36200211.9 ± 3.217089.1%31.6%16.4%
Turkey1720136–14210623.2%5.9%14.3%
Sweden3720064–151436%9%22%
India3820096–15124223.16%1.06%0.16%
Ethiopia3920147–154205.47%1.4%1.9%
Saudi Arabia4020135–15224665.7%9.9%
Pakistan4120145–16451221.89%0.63%0.76%
Iran (Dezful)320077–1555442.5%28.9%18.7%
Iran (Shiraz)1220107–1518721.73%8.95%11.27%
Iran (Bojnourd)1020126–1715510%10.8%11.5%
As demonstrated in this study, the prevalence of myopia in schoolchildren is significantly higher than the previous study performed 10 years ago in this population. Possible explanations include the effect of birth-cohort effect and changes in lifestyle. One of the important lifestyle changes in the past 10 years is increased near work activity as a result of increasing popularity and use of computers and portable computerized devices. The addition of non-native immigrants to this city has also significantly increased, and this may be another reason for the observed difference in the prevalence of myopia. As presented in Table 3, myopia has a high prevalence in countries such as China and Singapore, and affects more than half the children. We know from previous studies that East Asian countries are hotspots for myopia, and as demonstrated, rates are still lower in European countries. One important explanation for such differences can be study differences in age groups, definitions of myopia, and measurement methods. Nonetheless, even with similar age groups, myopia definition, and cycloplegic refraction, the myopia prevalence in this study is considerably high. Recent studies in Iran point to a high prevalence of myopia. While this can be difficult to explain, the most important reason seems to be changes in lifestyle, especially an increase in near work activity. This finding could indicate that we are in the pre-epidemic stage of myopia in children, and thus, serious work is needed to identify and treat refractive errors in this age group. Experimental studies are also needed so that a high incidence of myopia can be prevented. As for hyperopia, the prevalence was higher in girls and decreased with age. This relationship has been shown by many studies and is explained by AL changes with age and gender.13, 14 However, as demonstrated, the prevalence of hyperopia was also relatively high in this study and is higher than that previously reported from Iran and other parts of the world. (Table 3) A previous study in Dezful also confirmed the high prevalence of hyperopia in this city; therefore, genetics and ethnicity might have a role in this regard. Astigmatism was also highly prevalent in this study. Similar to myopia, astigmatism has been reported to be highly prevalent in East Asian countries.4, 6, 7, 8, 14, 19, 21, 42 Nonetheless, we did not expect to see a rate of 45% in the studied schoolchildren. As demonstrated in Table 3, apart from Singapore and Brazil, the prevalence of astigmatism is less than 20% in most countries. A possible explanation is the development of astigmatism as a result of incyclotorsion during near work activity which causes the contraction of ciliary muscles for accommodation and leads to central corneal steepening and increased power as well.43, 44 The new generation of children is also using computer devices more frequently which could lead to increased dry eye, eye rubbing, and consequently, astigmatism. In this study, the prevalence of astigmatism showed no significant change with age, but the prevalence was higher in males. Results of other studies regarding age, gender, and astigmatism are inconclusive, although more of them are in agreement with our results and showed higher rates of astigmatism in males.3, 4, 5, 15, 31 This study presented valuable information regarding refractive errors in school-age children. Nonetheless, the smaller sample size compared to previous studies and sampling from an urban population are limitations that should be noted. Lack of data on biometric measurements, family history, and history of near work activity are other limitations, without which we would be able to present better analytical results.
  41 in total

1.  Prevalence of the refractive errors by age and gender: the Mashhad eye study of Iran.

Authors:  Hadi Ostadimoghaddam; Akbar Fotouhi; Hassan Hashemi; Abbasali Yekta; Javad Heravian; Farhad Rezvan; Hamidreza Ghadimi; Bijan Rezvan; Mehdi Khabazkhoob
Journal:  Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2011-06-29       Impact factor: 4.207

2.  Prevalence of refractive errors in teenage high school students in Singapore.

Authors:  Timothy P L Quek; Choon Guan Chua; Choon Seng Chong; Jin Ho Chong; Hwee Weng Hey; June Lee; Yee Fei Lim; Seang-Mei Saw
Journal:  Ophthalmic Physiol Opt       Date:  2004-01       Impact factor: 3.117

3.  Prevalence of refractive errors among schoolchildren in Shiraz, Iran.

Authors:  Abbasali Yekta; Akbar Fotouhi; Hassan Hashemi; Cirous Dehghani; Hadi Ostadimoghaddam; Javad Heravian; Akbar Derakhshan; Reihaneh Yekta; Mehdi Behnia; Mehdi Khabazkhoob
Journal:  Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2010-04       Impact factor: 4.207

Review 4.  Global estimates of visual impairment: 2010.

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

5.  Prevalence and causes of amblyopia in a rural adult population of Chinese the Handan Eye Study.

Authors:  Yue Wang; Yuan Bo Liang; Lan Ping Sun; Xin Rong Duan; Rui Zhi Yuan; Tien Yin Wong; Peng Yi; David S Friedman; Ning Li Wang; Jie Jin Wang
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  2010-09-24       Impact factor: 12.079

6.  Refractive error in children in a rural population in India.

Authors:  Rakhi Dandona; Lalit Dandona; Marmamula Srinivas; Prashant Sahare; Saggam Narsaiah; Sergio R Muñoz; Gopal P Pokharel; Leon B Ellwein
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2002-03       Impact factor: 4.799

7.  Refractive status and prevalence of refractive errors in suburban school-age children.

Authors:  Lian-Hong Pi; Lin Chen; Qin Liu; Ning Ke; Jing Fang; Shu Zhang; Jun Xiao; Wei-Jiang Ye; Yan Xiong; Hui Shi; Zheng-Qin Yin
Journal:  Int J Med Sci       Date:  2010-10-18       Impact factor: 3.738

8.  Prevalence and risk factors for refractive errors in the Singapore Malay Eye Survey.

Authors:  Seang-Mei Saw; Yiong-Huak Chan; Wan-Ling Wong; Anoop Shankar; Mya Sandar; Tin Aung; Donald T H Tan; Paul Mitchell; Tien Yin Wong
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  2008-05-16       Impact factor: 12.079

9.  Visual disability, visual function, and myopia among rural chinese secondary school children: the Xichang Pediatric Refractive Error Study (X-PRES)--report 1.

Authors:  Nathan Congdon; Yunfei Wang; Yue Song; Kai Choi; Mingzhi Zhang; Zhongxia Zhou; Zhenling Xie; Liping Li; Xueyu Liu; Abhishek Sharma; Bin Wu; Dennis S C Lam
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2008-03-31       Impact factor: 4.799

10.  Ocular component data in schoolchildren as a function of age and gender.

Authors:  Karla Zadnik; Ruth E Manny; Julie A Yu; G Lynn Mitchell; Susan A Cotter; Julio C Quiralte; Melvin Shipp; Nina E Friedman; Robert N Kleinstein; Terry W Walker; Lisa A Jones; Melvin L Moeschberger; Donald O Mutti
Journal:  Optom Vis Sci       Date:  2003-03       Impact factor: 1.973

View more
  10 in total

1.  Three-year change in refractive error and its risk factors: results from the Shahroud School Children Eye Cohort Study.

Authors:  Carla Lanca; Mohammad Hassan Emamian; Yee Ling Wong; Hassan Hashemi; Mehdi Khabazkhoob; Andrzej Grzybowski; Seang Mei Saw; Akbar Fotouhi
Journal:  Eye (Lond)       Date:  2022-08-23       Impact factor: 4.456

2.  The prevalence and causes of pediatric uncorrected refractive error: Pooled data from population studies for Global Burden of Disease (GBD) sub-regions.

Authors:  He Cao; Xiang Cao; Zhi Cao; Lu Zhang; Yue Han; Changchun Guo
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-07-01       Impact factor: 3.752

3.  Prevalence of Refractive Error in School Children in Suining City of Sichuan Province, China: A School-Based Cross-Sectional Study.

Authors:  Linglin Liu; Heng Li; Zhijin Tang; Zaihong Huang; Xu Yang
Journal:  Appl Bionics Biomech       Date:  2022-05-26       Impact factor: 1.664

4.  The prevalence of visual disorders in Iranian students: A meta-analysis study and systematic review.

Authors:  Kambiz Keshavarz; Parvin Angha; Fatemeh Sayehmiri; Kourosh Sayemiri; Masood Yasemi
Journal:  Electron Physician       Date:  2017-10-25

Review 5.  Global and regional estimates of prevalence of refractive errors: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Hassan Hashemi; Akbar Fotouhi; Abbasali Yekta; Reza Pakzad; Hadi Ostadimoghaddam; Mehdi Khabazkhoob
Journal:  J Curr Ophthalmol       Date:  2017-09-27

6.  The Shiraz Pediatric Eye Study; a Population Based Survey of School Age Children: Rationale, Design and Baseline Characteristics.

Authors:  Mohammad Reza Talebnejad; Mohammad Hossein Nowroozzadeh; Hamideh Mahdaviazad; Mohammad Reza Khalili; Masoumeh Beygom Masoumpour; Maryam Keshtkar; Elham Mohammadi; Zahra Tajbakhsh
Journal:  J Ophthalmic Vis Res       Date:  2018 Jul-Sep

7.  Enantiomorphism and rule similarity in the astigmatism axes of fellow eyes: A population-based study.

Authors:  Hassan Hashemi; Amir Asharlous; Abbasali Yekta; Hadi Ostadimoghaddam; Masumeh Mohebi; Mohamadreza Aghamirsalim; Mehdi Khabazkhoob
Journal:  J Optom       Date:  2018-04-04

8.  The Effect of Dietary Supplementation of Crocetin for Myopia Control in Children: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Authors:  Kiwako Mori; Hidemasa Torii; Satoko Fujimoto; Xiaoyan Jiang; Shin-Ichi Ikeda; Erisa Yotsukura; Shizuka Koh; Toshihide Kurihara; Kohji Nishida; Kazuo Tsubota
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2019-08-07       Impact factor: 4.241

9.  Prevalence of refractive errors in school-going children of Taif region of Saudi Arabia.

Authors:  Talal A AlThomali; Majed AlQurashi; Abdulhamid S AlGhamdi; Afra Ibrahim; Farhan K AlSwailmi
Journal:  Saudi J Ophthalmol       Date:  2022-07-11

10.  The visual status of adolescents in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia: a population study.

Authors:  Ali Alsaqr; Ali Abu Sharha; Raied Fagehi; Awatif Almutairi; Sarah Alosaimi; Abdulrahman Almalki; Abdulaziz Alluwaymi
Journal:  Clin Ophthalmol       Date:  2018-05-22
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.