Search

Background: The eye-care seeking behaviour of parents for their children has a role to play in increasing or reducing the prevalence of childhood blindness. In Nigeria, little or no work has been done in this area. Hence, this study was carried out with a view to assisting eye-care professionals plan better program regimens and also to help them identify various elements that either facilitate or hinder eye-care seeking behaviour of parents for their school age children.Methods: This was a qualitative narrative study. Data were collected using in-depth interviews (IDIs) and focus group discussions (FGDs). Thirty-five parents and 10 eye-care practitioners were selected by random sampling and homogenous sampling methods, respectively. Parents were selected, based on those who sought care and those who did not seek care for their children after a school screening exercise. Collected data were analysed qualitatively by transcribing the voice recordings of interview sessions into textual data and themes were raised.Results: Four FGDs and 13 IDIs were conducted. Parents were more likely to seek care for manifest conditions than for conditions they could not perceive. A family history of ocular disease and repetitiveness of complaints facilitated parents to seek eye care for their children. The cost of eye-care services was a major barrier. Logistics such as fixing a doctor's appointment, getting time off work and long waiting periods at the clinic were also reported as barriers. Fear of treatment options and family interferences were also mentioned.Conclusion: Parents have some concerns and challenges in seeking eye care for their children. This study recommends that more work be done through planned awareness programs to educate parents and help them overcome the concerns and barriers that hinder them from seeking eye care for their children. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To identify the perceived barriers to the provision of clinical low-vision service among ophthalmologists in Nigeria, with a view to proffering measures for their removal. Methods: A cross-sectional survey of ophthalmologists attending the Annual Ophthalmological Society of Nigeria Congress in September 2005 was conducted. Using self-administered questionnaires, information relevant to low-vision practice and the perceived barriers to the provision of low-vision services was garnered. Results: Eighty-three (70.9%) ophthalmologists out of 117 eligible participants at the congress responded to all of the questions and returned the study questionnaires. Non-availability of low-vision devices within the country (88%), lack of training in low-vision care (73.5%), lack of public awareness of low-vision care and its practitioners (60.2%), and the ophthalmologists' preoccupation with general ophthalmic practice (56.6%) were cited as the major barriers. With regard to the fellows and the residents in training, there was a statistically significant difference in their perception of two of the investigated barriers, namely, that low-vision care is not lucrative (T value: 4.46; 95% CI: 0.16± 0.07) and low-vision care is time-consuming (T value: 2.05; 95% CI: 0.145± 0.14). Conclusion: Training in low-vision care should be provided within the country for interested relevant personnel at all levels. Moreover, low-vision devices should be made accessible and available to the practitioners. There is a need in Nigeria for widespread health education/awareness campaigns in low-vision care, targeted primarily at ophthalmologists, allied eye-care providers, and the general public. There is a need to include low-vision practice in the curriculum of the ophthalmology residency program in Nigeria. Further qualitative research may need to be conducted to explain the differences in responses between subsets of the study population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]