Isabel Signes-Soler1,2, David P Piñero3, Milagro Inés Murillo2, Silvia Tablada2. 1. University of Valencia, 46100 Burjassot, Valencia, Spain. 2. Vision Without Border, 03710 Calp, Alicante, Spain. 3. Department of Optics, Pharmacology and Anatomy, University of Alicante, Alicante 03690, Spain.
Abstract
AIM: To determine the distribution of refractive errors in a school-age population in Quintana Roo (Mexico) in the framework of an international cooperation campaign for the prevention of blindness. METHODS: A sample of 2647 school-age children (ranging from 5 to 14 years old) with a mean age of 9.1±1.9 years old were tested by trained volunteers for distance visual acuity (VA) and refractive errors. The first screening examination included uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) and VA with a +2.00 D lens. Inclusion criteria for a second complete cycloplegic eye examination performed by an optometrist were UDVA <20/25 (0.10 logMAR or 0.8 decimal) and/or VA with +2.00 D ≥20/25. RESULTS: A total of 633 (23.9%) children underwent the second complete eye examination. Mean logMAR UDVA was 0.035±0.094 (range 1.00 to 0.00 logMAR) for the right eyes and 0.036±0.160 (range 1.00 to 0.00 logMAR) for the left eyes. Bilateral amblyopia was found in 17 children (2.7% of refracted eyes; 0.64% of the total). The main reason for visual impairment (VI) in the sample analyzed was found to be refractive errors. In 12 children (1.9% of refracted eyes; 0.45% of the total) the VI was bilateral and 9 (1.4% of refracted eyes; 0.34% of the total) achieved a corrected distance visual acuity of 20/25 or better in both eyes. Mean magnitude of sphere and refractive cylinder was +0.20±0.96 D and -0.43±0.85 D in right eyes, and +0.24±1.08 and -0.43±0.83 D in left eyes. The proportion of myopic eyes [standard equivalent (SE) ≤-0.50 D] was 4.6% of the whole sample (5290 eyes). The mean magnitude of myopia was -0.84±3.44 D for the right eyes and -0.82±5.21 D for the left eyes. The proportion of hyperopic patients (SE≥+2.00 D) was 2.4% (15/633), which corresponded to 0.60% of the whole sample (32/5290 eyes). No statistically significant correlation of age to manifest sphere or cylinder was found. CONCLUSION: VI due to uncorrected refractive errors can be easily corrected with glasses but it is still a burden to be treated. Myopia is prevalent in this sample. More efforts towards correcting uncorrected refractive errors are needed. International Journal of Ophthalmology Press.
AIM: To determine the distribution of refractive errors in a school-age population in Quintana Roo (Mexico) in the framework of an international cooperation campaign for the prevention of blindness. METHODS: A sample of 2647 school-age children (ranging from 5 to 14 years old) with a mean age of 9.1±1.9 years old were tested by trained volunteers for distance visual acuity (VA) and refractive errors. The first screening examination included uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA) and VA with a +2.00 D lens. Inclusion criteria for a second complete cycloplegic eye examination performed by an optometrist were UDVA <20/25 (0.10 logMAR or 0.8 decimal) and/or VA with +2.00 D ≥20/25. RESULTS: A total of 633 (23.9%) children underwent the second complete eye examination. Mean logMAR UDVA was 0.035±0.094 (range 1.00 to 0.00 logMAR) for the right eyes and 0.036±0.160 (range 1.00 to 0.00 logMAR) for the left eyes. Bilateral amblyopia was found in 17 children (2.7% of refracted eyes; 0.64% of the total). The main reason for visual impairment (VI) in the sample analyzed was found to be refractive errors. In 12 children (1.9% of refracted eyes; 0.45% of the total) the VI was bilateral and 9 (1.4% of refracted eyes; 0.34% of the total) achieved a corrected distance visual acuity of 20/25 or better in both eyes. Mean magnitude of sphere and refractive cylinder was +0.20±0.96 D and -0.43±0.85 D in right eyes, and +0.24±1.08 and -0.43±0.83 D in left eyes. The proportion of myopic eyes [standard equivalent (SE) ≤-0.50 D] was 4.6% of the whole sample (5290 eyes). The mean magnitude of myopia was -0.84±3.44 D for the right eyes and -0.82±5.21 D for the left eyes. The proportion of hyperopic patients (SE≥+2.00 D) was 2.4% (15/633), which corresponded to 0.60% of the whole sample (32/5290 eyes). No statistically significant correlation of age to manifest sphere or cylinder was found. CONCLUSION:VI due to uncorrected refractive errors can be easily corrected with glasses but it is still a burden to be treated. Myopia is prevalent in this sample. More efforts towards correcting uncorrected refractive errors are needed. International Journal of Ophthalmology Press.
Authors: Kovin S Naidoo; Janet Leasher; Rupert R Bourne; Seth R Flaxman; Jost B Jonas; Jill Keeffe; Hans Limburg; Konrad Pesudovs; Holly Price; Richard A White; Tien Y Wong; Hugh R Taylor; Serge Resnikoff Journal: Optom Vis Sci Date: 2016-03 Impact factor: 1.973
Authors: Virgilio Galvis; Alejandro Tello; Johana Otero; Andres A Serrano; Luz María Gómez; Paul A Camacho; José Patricio López-Jaramillo Journal: Br J Ophthalmol Date: 2018-06-26 Impact factor: 4.638
Authors: Katie M Williams; Geir Bertelsen; Phillippa Cumberland; Christian Wolfram; Virginie J M Verhoeven; Eleftherios Anastasopoulos; Gabriëlle H S Buitendijk; Audrey Cougnard-Grégoire; Catherine Creuzot-Garcher; Maja Gran Erke; Ruth Hogg; René Höhn; Pirro Hysi; Anthony P Khawaja; Jean-François Korobelnik; Janina Ried; Johannes R Vingerling; Alain Bron; Jean-François Dartigues; Astrid Fletcher; Albert Hofman; Robert W A M Kuijpers; Robert N Luben; Konrad Oxele; Fotis Topouzis; Therese von Hanno; Alireza Mirshahi; Paul J Foster; Cornelia M van Duijn; Norbert Pfeiffer; Cécile Delcourt; Caroline C W Klaver; Jugnoo Rahi; Christopher J Hammond Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 2015-05-13 Impact factor: 12.079
Authors: Donovan S Reed; Lyndsey M Ferris; Joseph Santamaria; Aditya Mehta; Marc Musto; Doug Apsey; Gary L Legault Journal: Clin Ophthalmol Date: 2020-01-17