Search

Purpose: To identify socio-economic, demographic, and clinical factors that may be associated with sibling access to ophthalmic check-up. Methods: A cross-sectional, descriptive study investigated children in the age group of 0–15 years under a project on Systematic Pediatric Eye Care Through Sibling Screening Strategies (SPECSSS project). The siblings of pediatric patients (proband) with refractive errors, strabismus, cataract, glaucoma, and retinal pathologies were given a referral card for ophthalmic check-up. If parents do not bring siblings for check-up within 1 month of initial information and even after 2 SMS reminders, it was considered as failure to uptake of services. On follow-up later, they were provided a questionnaire. A questionnaire was given to the parent by interview through a project coordinator, and details were obtained from the parents or caretaker. Parents who were willing for telephonic interview were asked to respond to the questionnaire over phone on the scheduled date. The sibling details, parent-related details, and data from questionnaire forms were entered and analyzed. Results: The mean age of 300 siblings was 9.3 ± 4.0 years with the majority of them being female (158). The most common reasons quoted by parents in the rural area compared with the urban area for not bringing siblings for eye exams were the travel distance from home to the hospital (n = 118, 83.7%), the travel time from home to the hospital (n = 109, 77.3%), more than one vehicle required to change (n = 111, 78.7%), and the transportation cost more than rupees 100 (INR) (n = 89, 63.1%) (p < 0.05). Unable to leave work responsibilities (n = 126, 79.3%) was stated more frequently by urban parents compared to rural (p = 0.039). Conclusion: Our study suggests that the financial factor, the distance factor, and social belief play an important role in timely uptake of sibling eye check-up. Targeting siblings with treatable pediatric eye diseases could help in reducing the burden of refractive error, strabismus, and cataract in the pediatric population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To study the clinical and demographic profile of patients less than 40 years of age presenting to glaucoma services including the reasons for referral.Methods: Patients in the age group of 5 to 39 years, visiting the glaucoma clinic, who were either suspected to have glaucoma or who had been newly/previously diagnosed with glaucoma were included in the study. After informed written consent, basic demographic details of the participants including age, gender, education, socioeconomic status, and family history were obtained. A comprehensive ophthalmological evaluation was performed by glaucoma specialists.Results: The proportion of glaucoma in the study population (n = 384) was found to be 31.25%, and the incidence of glaucoma among new patients was found to be 11.9%. Among all glaucomas (n = 120), 44.2% of patients had secondary glaucomas, 27.5% had primary glaucomas, and 28.3% had congenital glaucomas. Also, 67.3% of all glaucoma patients were males. Newly diagnosed glaucoma patients presented with a mean intraocular pressure (IOP) of 32.9 mmHg and mild-moderate disc damage with a mean cup-disc ratio of 0.65. Nearly one-third of them had a presenting visual acuity worse than 5/60. The most common reason for referral was raised IOP. Univariate and multivariate analysis revealed that the odds of developing glaucoma were less in females (P = 0.04) and in patients with a higher standard of living index (P < 0.001).Conclusion: One-third of the patients had glaucoma and another one-third were suspects. Secondary glaucomas are more common than primary/congenital glaucomas. A comprehensive eye evaluation is a must, especially in those with predisposing factors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]