| Literature DB >> 28817733 |
Nasiru Muhammad1, Mohammed Dantani Adamu1, Mpyet Caleb2,3,4, Nuhu Mohammed Maishanu5, Aliyu Mohammed Jabo6, Muhammad Mansur Rabiu7, Covadonga Bascaran8, Sunday Isiyaku3, Allen Foster8.
Abstract
PURPOSE: This study was conducted to assess the impact of the eye care programme on cataract blindness and cataract surgical services in Sokoto, Nigeria over a 12 year period 2005-2016.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28817733 PMCID: PMC5560675 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0183421
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Target population and sample examined in Wurno health zone, 2016.
| Age | Target Population | Sample Population | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Males | Females | Total | Males | Females | Total | |||||||
| N | % | N | % | N | % | N | % | N | % | N | % | |
| 50–59 | 28,865 | 26.5 | 20,227 | 18.6 | 49,092 | 45.1 | 434 | 18.0 | 303 | 12.6 | 737 | 30.6 |
| 60–69 | 17,294 | 15.9 | 12,321 | 11.3 | 29,615 | 27.2 | 522 | 21.7 | 454 | 18.9 | 976 | 40.6 |
| 70–79 | 9,657 | 8.9 | 6,945 | 6.4 | 16,602 | 15.3 | 243 | 10.1 | 245 | 10.2 | 488 | 20.3 |
| 80+ | 7,554 | 6.9 | 5,943 | 5.5 | 13,497 | 12.4 | 105 | 4.4 | 99 | 4.1 | 204 | 8.5 |
| 58.2 | 41.8 | 100.0 | 54.2 | 45.8 | 100.0 | |||||||
* An estimation of the 2016 population was made based upon the last available Census (2006).
Age-sex adjusted prevalence of cataract: Wurno health zone 2016.
| <3/60% (95% CI) | <6/60% (95% CI) | <6/18% (95% CI) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1.9 (1.3, 2.5) | 2.4 (1.8, 3.0) | 7.3 (6.2, 8.4) | |
| 5.9 (5.0, 6.8) | 7.1 (6.1, 8.1) | 12.8 (11.1, 14.4) |
Cataract surgical coverage (CSC persons and eyes): Wurno health zone 2016.
| Persons | Eyes | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 83 | 23 | 16 | 305 | 158 | 129 | |
| 60 | 60 | 60 | 66 | 66 | 66 | |
| 115 | 41 | 35 | 385 | 222 | 188 | |
| 45 | 45 | 45 | 50 | 50 | 50 | |
| 198 | 64 | 51 | 690 | 380 | 317 | |
| 105 | 105 | 105 | 116 | 116 | 116 | |
*Cataract Surgical Coverage = Had cataract extraction x 100%
Had cataract extraction + Unoperated cataract
Visual outcome after cataract intervention (eyes): Wurno health zone 2016.
| Visual outcome | Non-IOL | Pseudophakia | Couched | Total | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| N (%) | N (%) | N (%) | N (%) | ||
| 1 (33.3) | 66 (58.4) | 0 | 67 (31.3) | ||
| 0 | 27 (23.9) | 10 (10.2) | 37 (17.3) | ||
| 2 (66.7) | 20 (17.7) | 88 (89.8) | 110 (51.4) | ||
| 1 (33.3) | 78 (69.0) | 13 (13.3) | 92 (43.0) | ||
| 0 | 24 (21.2) | 30 (30.6) | 54 (25.2) | ||
| 2 (66.7) | 11 (9.7) | 55 (56.1) | 68 (31.8) | ||
IOL–intraocular lens
Pseudophakia–an eye operated for cataract with IOL insertion.
Causes of poor and borderline visual outcome in pseudophakic eyes: Wurno health zone 2016.
| Cause | Borderline | Poor | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| <6/18–6/60 | VA<6/60—NLP | <6/18—NLP | |
| N (%) | N (%) | N (%) | |
| 11 (40.7) | 7 (35) | 18 (38.3) | |
| 4 (14.8) | 3 (15) | 7 (14.9) | |
| 9 (33.3) | 2 (10) | 11 (23.4) | |
| 3 (11.1) | 8 (40) | 11 (23.4) | |
Fig 1Trends in Cataract Surgical Rate, Sokoto State, 2006–2014.
Fig 2Cataract Service Indicators from the 2005 and 2016 surveys.