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: Uncorrected refractive errors for distance among the residents in 'homes for the aged' in South India-The Hyderabad Ocular Morbidity in Elderly Study (HOMES).
    Author: Marmamula S, Barrenkala NR, Challa R, Kumbam TR, Modepalli SB, Yellapragada R, Bhakki M, Khanna RC, Friedman DS.
    Journal: Ophthalmic Physiol Opt; 2020 May; 40(3):343-349. PubMed ID: 32207179.
    Abstract:
    PURPOSE: To investigate the prevalence and risk factors of Uncorrected Refractive Errors (URE) for distance in elderly residents in 'homes for the aged' in Hyderabad, India. METHODS: Individuals aged ≥60 years and residing in 'homes for the aged' in Hyderabad, India for a minimum of 1 month and providing consent for participation were recruited. All participants underwent visual acuity assessment, refraction, slit lamp biomicroscopy, intraocular pressure measurement, fundus examination, and retinal imaging. Monocular presenting visual acuity was recorded using a logMAR chart. Objective and subjective refraction were performed, and best-corrected visual acuity was recorded. URE was defined as presenting visual acuity worse than 6/12 but improving to 6/12 or better with refraction. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to assess the risk factors associated with URE. RESULTS: In total, 1 513 elderly participants were enumerated from 41 homes of which 1 182 participants (78.1%) were examined. The mean age of participants was 75.0 years (standard deviation 8.8 years; range: 60-108 years). 35.4% of those examined were men and 20.3% had no formal education. The prevalence of URE was 13.5% (95% CI: 11.5-15.5; n = 159). On applying multiple logistic regression analysis, compared to those living in private homes, the odds of URE were significantly higher among the elderly living in the aided homes (OR: 1.65; 95% CI: 1.11-2.43) and free homes (OR: 1.67; 95% CI: 1.00-2.80). As compared to those who reported having an eye examination in the last 3 years, the odds of URE were higher among those who never had an eye examination in the last three years (OR: 1.51; 95% CI: 1.07-2.14). Similarly, those who had unilateral cataract surgery (OR: 1.80; 95% CI: 1.10-2.93) or bilateral cataract surgery (1.69; 95% CI: 1.10-2.56) had higher odds of URE compared to those elderly who were not operated for cataract. Gender, self-report of diabetes, and education were not associated with URE. CONCLUSIONS: A large burden of URE was found among the residents in the 'homes for the aged' in Hyderabad, India which could be addressed with a pair of glasses. Over 40% of the residents never had an eye examination in the last three years, which indicates poor utilisation of eye care services by the elderly. Regular eye examinations and provision of spectacles are needed to address needless URE for distance among the elderly in residential care in India.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]