Uncorrected refractive error in older British adults: the EPIC-Norfolk Eye Study. Issue 7 (25th April 2012)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Sherwin, Justin C; Khawaja, Anthony P; Broadway, David; Luben, Robert; Hayat, Shabina; Dalzell, Nichola; Wareham, Nicholas J; Khaw, Kay-Tee; Foster, Paul J
• Is Part Of: British journal of ophthalmology. Volume 96:Issue 7(2012)
• Page Start: 991
• Page End: 996
• Publication Date: 2012-04-25
• Subjects: Uncorrected refractive error -- epidemiology -- spectacles -- public health -- treatment medical -- wound healing -- field of vision -- optic nerve -- drugs -- intraocular pressure -- imaging -- ciliary body -- clinical trial -- treatment surgery -- experimental and laboratory -- glaucoma -- vision -- optics and refraction -- treatment lasers -- angle; Ophthalmology -- Periodicals; 617.7
• DOI: 10.1136/bjophthalmol-2011-301430
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0007-1161

Abstract

Abstract : Aim: To investigate the prevalence of, and demographic associations with, uncorrected refractive error (URE) in an older British population. Methods: Data from 4428 participants, aged 48–89 years, who attended an eye examination in the third health check of the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer-Norfolk study and had also undergone an ophthalmic examination were assessed. URE was defined as ≥1 line improvement of visual acuity with pinhole-correction in the better eye in participants with LogMar presenting visual acuity (PVA) <0.3 (PVA <6/12). Refractive error was measured using an autorefractor without cycloplegia. Myopia was defined as spherical equivalent ≤−0.5 dioptre, and hypermetropia ≥0.5 dioptre. Results: Adjusted to the 2010 midyear British population, the prevalence of URE in this Norfolk population was 1.9% (95% CI 0.6% to 3.1%). Lower self-rated distance vision was correlated with higher prevalence of URE (ptrend <0.001). In a multivariate logistic regression model adjusting for age, gender, retirement status, educational level and social class, independent significant associations with URE were increasing age (ptrend <0.001) and having hypermetropic or myopic refractive error. Wearing distance spectacles was inversely associated with URE (OR 0.34, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.55, p<0.001). There were 3063 people (69.2%) who wore spectacles/contact lenses for distance vision. Spectacle wear differed according to type of refractive error (p<0.001), and use rose with increasing severity of refractive error (ptrend <0.001). Conclusion: Although refractive error is common, the prevalence of URE was found to be low in this population reflecting a low prevalence of PVA<0.3.