These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: [How is ophthalmic undersupply demonstrated in socially disadvantaged people? Cross-sectional pilot investigation on the parametrisation of endpoints for patient-centred care research].
    Author: Bestges BB, Lösche CC, Krummenauer F.
    Journal: Klin Monbl Augenheilkd; 2013 Jul; 230(7):721-6. PubMed ID: 23877824.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: Many people depend on additional help to maintain their daily needs. In these circumstances preventive medical check-ups are frequently not attended, so that disease development may remain undetected until advanced stages or correctable disorders may not be treated. A fully anonymised cross-sectional study was set up to assess feasibility of parametrisation and to quantify sensitive indicators for screening for possible ophthalmic undersupply in socially disadvantaged people. METHODS: In 2011 a free, voluntary and anonymous ophthalmic examination was offered to attendees of the "Oberhausener Tafel" social project. The visual acuity was checked with adjustment of the objective refractional error via autorefractor, without or with glasses (if available). In addition, an examination of the anterior and posterior segments of the eye was done in miosis. As primary endpoint a corrected visual acuity of > 0.5 combined with a presenting visual acuity ≤ 0.5 on the same eye in at least one eye was considered. A key secondary endpoint was defined as the absolute deviation of at least 1 D in at least one eye between the spherical equivalent measurement of the corrective values of the glasses and the autorefractor readings. The primary intention of this pilot investigation was to assess the feasibility of this endpoint parametrisation and to quantify the corresponding endpoint prevalences. RESULTS: Data of 37 participants could be evaluated, 28 of whom brought their glasses. The best available visual acuity ranged from 0.12 to 1.3 with a median per eye of 0.63. In comparison, the corrected visual acuity per eye was 0.8 (range 0.32-1.0). In 54 % the presenting visual acuity was one- or both-eyed ≤ 0.5, but could be reduced to 30 % (one- or both-eyed) after correction of the objective refractional error. In summary, presenting visual acuity in comparison to corrected visual acuity showed potential for an at least one-eyed improvement for at least two lines in 46 % of the participants. Furthermore, 19 participants showed disorders concerning the anterior or posterior eye segment. CONCLUSION: In the examined population the visual acuity could be improved by two lines in merely 50 % of the participants by adjusting refractive errors. The results indicate the need for discussion on how to lower the threshold for attending preventive ophthalmic examinations.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]