Search

Purpose: Uncorrected refractive error is the leading cause of vision impairment globally; however, little attention has been given to equity and access to services. This study aimed to identify and prioritise: (1) strategies to address inequity of access to refractive error services and (2) population groups to target with these strategies in five sub-regions within the Western Pacific., Methods: We invited eye care professionals to complete a two-round online prioritisation process. In round 1, panellists nominated population groups least able to access refractive error services, and strategies to improve access. Responses were summarised and presented in round 2, where panellists ranked the groups (by extent of difficulty and size) and strategies (in terms of reach, acceptability, sustainability, feasibility and equity). Groups and strategies were scored according to their rank within each sub-region., Results: Seventy five people from 17 countries completed both rounds (55% women). Regional differences were evident. Indigenous peoples were a priority group for improving access in Australasia and Southeast Asia, while East Asia identified refugees and Oceania identified rural/remote people. Across the five sub-regions, reducing out-of-pocket costs was a commonly prioritised strategy for refraction and spectacles. Australasia prioritised improving cultural safety, East Asia prioritised strengthening school eye health programmes and Oceania and Southeast Asia prioritised outreach to rural areas., Conclusion: These results provide policy-makers, researchers and funders with a starting point for context-specific actions to improve access to refractive error services, particularly among underserved population groups who may be left behind in existing private sector-dominated models of care., (© 2024 The Author(s). Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of College of Optometrists.)

Purpose: Uncorrected refractive error (URE) is the leading cause of vision impairment and the second leading cause of blindness. It is a major public health challenge worldwide. However, the current status of URE in Japan is unclear., Study Design: Cross-sectional study., Methods: In 2012, a population-based cross-sectional study was conducted among community dwellers aged 40 years and older who received health check-ups in Minamiaizu and Tadami, Fukushima Prefecture, Japan. URE was considered when the presenting visual acuity in the better-seeing eye was < 0.5 and when visual acuity improved more than 1 line with refractive correction in the better-seeing eye. We estimated the age-specific prevalence of URE, and calculated the p-value for trend to examine the linear pattern of the association of the prevalence of URE and age., Results: This analysis included 2952 participants. The mean age (standard deviation [SD]) of the study population was 69.10(9.67) years and 57.79% were women. The overall prevalence of URE was 10.90% (95% CI, 9.77-12.05%). Prevalence by age category was 5.00% (95% CI, 2.03-10.03%), 6.09% (95% CI, 3.59-9.58%), 7.02% (95% CI, 5.49-8.81%), 11.96% (95% CI, 10.15-13.97%), and 22.39% (95% CI, 18.41-26.78%) for 40-49 years, 50-59 years, 60-69 years, 70-79 years, and 80 years or older, respectively (p-for trend, < 0.001)., Conclusions: The prevalence of URE was 10.9% and exceeded 20%, especially in individuals older than 80 years. Given the correlation between increasing incidence of URE and increase in age, public health intervention to promote awareness of URE is important, especially for the older population., (© 2022. Japanese Ophthalmological Society.)

Purpose: To investigate the prevalence and factors associated with uncorrected presbyopia among rural community dwellers in Japan. Study design: A population-based cross-sectional study was conducted in 2011 among community dwellers aged 40–74 years who received specific health checkups in Minamiaizu and Tadami, Fukushima Prefecture, Japan. Methods: Uncorrected presbyopia was considered as when the distance-corrected visual acuity in the better eye was ≥0.5 and the near-presenting visual acuity in the better eye was <0.4, regardless of distance refractive status. Multiple logistic regression analysis was employed to calculate the odds ratios (ORs) for uncorrected presbyopia and to adjust for possible confounders. Results: A total of 2054 individuals participated in the specific health checkups. In the 1156 individuals (response rate: 56.28%) analyzed in the study, the mean (SD) age was 63.0 (8.7) years, the percentage of women was higher (57.87%), and the prevalence of uncorrected presbyopia was 26.38% (95% CI 23.86%–29.03%). Multivariate analysis revealed that the factors associated with uncorrected presbyopia were older age (adjusted OR: 1.054 [95% CI: 1.034–1.075]), female sex (adjusted OR: 1.388 [95% CI: 1.006–1.915]), and distance-presenting vision impairment (adjusted OR: 2.651 [95% CI: 1.697–4.143]). Conclusion: Approximately one-quarter of the participants in this study from a rural population of Japan did not have adequate near vision. It is recommended that a public health intervention should be enacted to correct presbyopia, especially in the older age group, women, and those with uncorrected refractive errors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]