BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 1992
Visual problems in the elderly population and implications for services.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Wormald R P, Wright L A, Courtney P, Beaumont B, Haines A P
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To determine the prevalence of visual disability and common eye disease among elderly people in inner London.
DESIGN: Cross sectional random sample survey.
SETTING: Inner London health centre.
SUBJECTS: Random sample of people aged 65 and over taken from practice's computerised age-sex register.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Presenting binocular Snellen 6 m distance acuity and best monocular 3 m Sonksen-Silver acuity to classify prevalence of blindness by World Health Organisation criteria (less than 3/60 in better eye) and American criteria for legal blindness (better eye equal to 6/60 or less) and of low vision by WHO criteria (best acuity 6/18) and visual impairment by American criteria (less than 6/12 or 20/40 but greater than 6/60 or 20/200 in better eye). Principal cause of visual loss by diagnosis, referral indication by cause to hospital eye service, and proportion of cases known to primary care.
RESULTS: 207 of 288 (72%) eligible people were examined. 17 (8%) housebound subjects were examined at home. The prevalence of blindness was 1% by WHO criteria and 3.9% by American criteria. The prevalence of low vision (WHO criteria) was 7.7%. The prevalence of visual impairment (American criteria) was 10.6%. Cataract accounted for 75% of cases of low vision. Only eight out of 16 patients with low vision were known by their general practitioner to have an eye problem. 56 subjects (27%) would probably have benefited from refraction. Comparisons with studies in the United States and Finland suggested higher rates in this sample, mainly due to the prevalence of disabling cataract.
CONCLUSION: There seems to be a considerable amount of undetected ocular disease in elderly people in the community.
DESIGN: Cross sectional random sample survey.
SETTING: Inner London health centre.
SUBJECTS: Random sample of people aged 65 and over taken from practice's computerised age-sex register.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Presenting binocular Snellen 6 m distance acuity and best monocular 3 m Sonksen-Silver acuity to classify prevalence of blindness by World Health Organisation criteria (less than 3/60 in better eye) and American criteria for legal blindness (better eye equal to 6/60 or less) and of low vision by WHO criteria (best acuity 6/18) and visual impairment by American criteria (less than 6/12 or 20/40 but greater than 6/60 or 20/200 in better eye). Principal cause of visual loss by diagnosis, referral indication by cause to hospital eye service, and proportion of cases known to primary care.
RESULTS: 207 of 288 (72%) eligible people were examined. 17 (8%) housebound subjects were examined at home. The prevalence of blindness was 1% by WHO criteria and 3.9% by American criteria. The prevalence of low vision (WHO criteria) was 7.7%. The prevalence of visual impairment (American criteria) was 10.6%. Cataract accounted for 75% of cases of low vision. Only eight out of 16 patients with low vision were known by their general practitioner to have an eye problem. 56 subjects (27%) would probably have benefited from refraction. Comparisons with studies in the United States and Finland suggested higher rates in this sample, mainly due to the prevalence of disabling cataract.
CONCLUSION: There seems to be a considerable amount of undetected ocular disease in elderly people in the community.