Search

Background: Ocular trauma is a significant cause of blindness and is often missed in polytrauma. No contemporary studies report eye injuries in the setting of severe trauma in the UK. We investigated ocular injury epidemiology and trends among patients suffering major trauma in England and Wales from 2004 to 2021., Methods: We conducted a retrospective study utilising the Trauma Audit and Research Network (TARN) registry. Major trauma cases with concomitant eye injuries were included. Major trauma was defined as Injury Severity Score >15. Ocular injuries included globe, cranial nerve II, III, IV, and VI, and tear duct injuries. Orbital fractures and adnexal and lid injuries were not included. Demographics, injury profiles, and outcomes were extracted. We report descriptive statistics and 3-yearly trends., Results: Of 287 267 major trauma cases, 2368 (0.82%) had ocular injuries: prevalence decreased from 1.87% to 0.66% over the 2004-2021 period (P < 0.0001). Males comprised 72.2% of ocular injury cases, median age was 34.5 years. The proportion of ocular injuries from road traffic collisions fell from 43.1% to 25.3% while fall-related injuries increased and predominated (37.6% in 2019/21). Concomitant head injury occurred in 86.6%. The most common site of ocular injury was the conjunctiva (29.3%). Compared to previous TARN data (1989-2004), retinal injuries were threefold more prevalent (5.9% vs 18.5%), while corneal injuries were less (31.0% vs 6.6%)., Conclusions: Whilst identifying eye injuries in major trauma is challenging, it appears ocular injury epidemiology in this setting has shifted, though overall prevalence is low. These findings may inform prevention strategies, guideline development and resource allocation., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Understanding and mitigating the societal economic impact of vision impairment (VI) is important for achieving the Sustainable Development Goals., Aim: To estimate the prevalent societal economic impact of presenting VI in Trinidad and Tobago using bottom-up cost and utilisation data from the 2014 National Eye Survey of Trinidad and Tobago., Methods: We took a societal perspective to combine comprehensive, individual-level cost and utilisation data, with population-based prevalence estimates for VI, and additional data from a contemporaneous national eyecare system survey. We included direct (medical and non-medical) and indirect (productivity loss) costs, and intangible losses in total cost estimates, presented in 2014 Trinidad & Tobago (TT) dollars and UK sterling equivalent. We considered but excluded transfer payments and dead weight losses. Sensitivity analyses explored impact on total cost of parameter uncertainty and assumptions., Results: Individual utilisation and cost data were available for 65.5% (n = 2792/4263) and 59.0% (n = 2516/4263) eligible participants aged ≥40 years, respectively. Participant mean age was 58.4(SD 11.8, range 40-103) years, 56.3% were female. We estimated total societal cost of VI in 2014 at UK£365,650,241 (TT$3,842,324,655), equivalent to £675 per capita (population ≥40 years). Loss of wellbeing accounted for 73.3%. Excluding this, the economic cost was UK£97,547,222 (TT$1,025,045,399), of which indirect costs accounted for 70.5%, followed by direct medical costs (17.9%), and direct non-medical costs (11.6%)., Conclusion: This study provides a comprehensive estimate of the economic impact of vision loss in a Caribbean country, and highlights the extent to which affected individuals and their families bear the societal economic cost of vision impairment., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background: Little was known about the population coverage and causes of sight impairment (SI) registration within the Caribbean, or the extent to which register studies offer insights into population eye health., Methods: We compared causes of SI registration in the Trinidad and Tobago Blind Welfare Association (TTBWA) register with findings from the 2014 National Eye Survey of Trinidad and Tobago (NESTT), and estimated registration coverage. Cross-sectional validation studies of registered clients included interviews, visual function and cause ascertainment in July 2013, and interviews and visual function in July 2016., Results: The TTBWA register included 863 people (all ages, 48.1%(n = 415) male) registered between 1951 and 2015. The NESTT identified 1.1%(75/7158) people aged ≥5years eligible for partial or severe SI registration, of whom 49.3%(n = 37) were male. Registration coverage was approximately 7% of the eligible population of Trinidad. Nevertheless, there was close agreement in the causes of SI comparing the register and population-representative survey. Glaucoma was the leading cause in both the register (26.1%,n = 225) and population-based survey (26.1%, 18/69 adults), followed by cataract and diabetic retinopathy. In the validation studies combined, 62.6%(93/151) clients had severe SI, 28.5%(43/151) had partial SI and 9.9%(15/151) did not meet SI eligibility criteria. SI was potentially avoidable in at least 58%(n = 36/62) adults and 50%(n = 7/14) children., Conclusion: We report very low register coverage of the SI population, but close agreement in causes of SI to a contemporaneous national population-based eye survey, half of which resulted from preventable or treatable eye disease., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Objectives: To validate and update the 2013 James Lind Alliance (JLA) Sight Loss and Vision Priority Setting Partnership (PSP)'s research priorities for Ophthalmology, as part of the UK Clinical Eye Research Strategy., Methods: Twelve ophthalmology research themes were identified from the JLA report. They were allocated to five Clinical Study Groups of diverse stakeholders who reviewed the top 10 research priorities for each theme. Using an online survey (April 2021-February 2023), respondents were invited to complete one or more of nine subspecialty surveys. Respondents indicated which of the research questions they considered important and subsequently ranked them., Results: In total, 2240 people responded to the survey (mean age, 59.3 years), from across the UK. 68.1% were female. 68.2% were patients, 22.3% healthcare professionals or vision researchers, 7.1% carers, and 2.1% were charity support workers. Highest ranked questions by subspecialty: Cataract (prevention), Cornea (improving microbial keratitis treatment), Optometric (impact of integration of ophthalmic primary and secondary care via community optometric care pathways), Refractive (factors influencing development and/or progression of refractive error), Childhood onset (improving early detection of visual disorders), Glaucoma (effective and improved treatments), Neuro-ophthalmology (improvements in prevention, diagnosis and treatment of neurodegeneration affecting vision), Retina (improving prevention, diagnosis and treatment of dry age-related macular degeneration), Uveitis (effective treatments for ocular and orbital inflammatory diseases)., Conclusions: A decade after the initial PSP, the results refocus the most important research questions for each subspecialty, and prime targeted research proposals within Ophthalmology, a chronically underfunded specialty given the substantial burden of disability caused by eye disease., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Data on population-based self-reported dual vision and hearing impairment are sparse in Europe. We aimed to investigate self-reported dual sensory impairment (DSI) in European population., Methods: A standardised questionnaire was used to collect medical and socio-economic data among individuals aged 15 years or more in 29 European countries. Individuals living in collective households or in institutions were excluded from the survey., Results: Among 296 677 individuals, the survey included 153 866 respondents aged 50 years old or more. The crude prevalence of DSI was of 7.54% (7.36-7.72). Among individuals aged 60 or more, 9.23% of men and 10.94% of women had DSI. Eastern and southern countries had a higher prevalence of DSI. Multivariable analyses showed that social isolation and poor self-rated health status were associated with DSI with ORs of 2.01 (1.77-2.29) and 2.33 (2.15-2.52), while higher income was associated with lower risk of DSI (OR of 0.83 (0.78-0.89). Considering country-level socioeconomic factors, Human Development Index explained almost 38% of the variance of age-adjusted prevalence of DSI., Conclusion: There are important differences in terms of prevalence of DSI in Europe, depending on socioeconomic and medical factors. Prevention of DSI does represent an important challenge for maintaining quality of life in elderly population., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: The prevalence of myopia is increasing worldwide. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the progression of myopia in teenagers and adults in France., Methods: This nationwide prospective study followed 630 487 myopic adults and teenagers (mean age 43.4 years±18.2, 59.8% of women) between January 2013 and January 2019. Myopia and high myopia were defined as a spherical equivalent less than or equal to -0.50 and -6.00 diopters (D), respectively. Demographic data were collected at first visit and refractive characteristics were collected at each visit. Analysis of short-term progression (first 12 to 26 months postbaseline) was modelled using analysis of variance (ANOVA). Progression of myopia was stratified according to age, gender and spherical equivalent at first visit., Results: Higher proportions of progressors were observed in the youngest age groups: 14-15 (18.2 %) and 16-17 years old (13.9 %). In multivariate analysis, after adjustment for over age, spherical equivalent and gender, the mean short-term progression decreased from -0.36 D in the 14-15 years age group to -0.13 D in the 28-29 years age group. Young age and higher myopia at baseline together were strongly associated with the risk of developing high myopia, the 5-year cumulative risk being 76% for youngest teenager with higher myopia status at baseline., Conclusion: In this large cohort of myopic teenagers and adults, myopia progression was reported in 18.2% and 13.9% of the 14-15 and 16-17 age groups, respectively. The risk to develop high myopia was higher for younger individuals with higher myopia at baseline examination., Competing Interests: Competing interests: Alexandre Ducloux, Rupert Bourne and Pierre Ingrand have no financial disclosures. Nicolas Leveziel reports personal fees from Novartis, personal fees from Allergan, personal fees from Bayer, outside the submitted work. Simon Marillet reports grants from Krys Group during the conduct of the study. Mark A. Bullimore reports personal fees from Alcon Research, inc., personal fees from Allergan, inc., personal fees from Apellis, inc., personal fees from Arctic Vision, inc., personal fees from CooperVision, inc., personal fees from CorneaGen, inc., personal fees from Essilor, inc., personal fees from Euclid Systems, inc., personal fees from Eyenovia, inc., personal fees from Genentech, AG, personal fees from Johnson & Johnson Vision, inc., personal fees from Novartis, AG, personal fees from Oculus, AG, personal fees from Paragon Vision Sciences, inc., personal fees from Presbia, inc., personal fees from Sydnexis, inc., personal fees from Wells Fargo, inc., outside the submitted work., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Cataract is the leading cause of blindness globally. Effective cataract surgical coverage (eCSC) measures the number of people in a population who have been operated on for cataract, and had a good outcome, as a proportion of all people operated on or requiring surgery. Therefore, eCSC describes service access (ie, cataract surgical coverage, [CSC]) adjusted for quality. The 74th World Health Assembly endorsed a global target for eCSC of a 30-percentage point increase by 2030. To enable monitoring of progress towards this target, we analysed Rapid Assessment of Avoidable Blindness (RAAB) survey data to establish baseline estimates of eCSC and CSC., Methods: In this secondary analysis, we used data from 148 RAAB surveys undertaken in 55 countries (2003-21) to calculate eCSC, CSC, and the relative quality gap (% difference between eCSC and CSC). Eligible studies were any version of the RAAB survey conducted since 2000 with individual participant survey data and census population data for people aged 50 years or older in the sampling area and permission from the study's principal investigator for use of data. We compared median eCSC between WHO regions and World Bank income strata and calculated the pooled risk difference and risk ratio comparing eCSC in men and women., Findings: Country eCSC estimates ranged from 3·8% (95% CI 2·1-5·5) in Guinea Bissau, 2010, to 70·3% (95% CI 65·8-74·9) in Hungary, 2015, and the relative quality gap from 10·8% (CSC: 65·7%, eCSC: 58·6%) in Argentina, 2013, to 73·4% (CSC: 14·3%, eCSC: 3·8%) in Guinea Bissau, 2010. Median eCSC was highest among high-income countries (60·5% [IQR 55·6-65·4]; n=2 surveys; 2011-15) and lowest among low-income countries (14·8%; [IQR 8·3-20·7]; n=14 surveys; 2005-21). eCSC was higher in men than women (148 studies pooled risk difference 3·2% [95% CI 2·3-4·1] and pooled risk ratio of 1·20 [95% CI 1·15-1·25])., Interpretation: eCSC varies widely between countries, increases with greater income level, and is higher in men. In pursuit of 2030 targets, many countries, particularly in lower-resource settings, should emphasise quality improvement before increasing access to surgery. Equity must be embedded in efforts to improve access to surgery, with a focus on underserved groups., Funding: Indigo Trust, Peek Vision, and Wellcome Trust., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests MJB declares funding support from the Wellcome Trust (207472/Z/17/Z) via a grant to the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine. AB declares funding from the Wellcome Trust (215633/Z/19/Z); and declares being the Co-Founder and Chief Executive Officer of both the Peek Vision Foundation (UK charity number 1165960) and Peek Vision (UK company number 09937174) which is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Peek Vision Foundation. IM, RB, and IZM declare funding support from Peek Vision via a grant to the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine. JMF declares consulting fees as a technical adviser for SightFirst/Lions Club International Latin America. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: In 2021, WHO Member States endorsed a global target of a 40-percentage-point increase in effective refractive error coverage (eREC; with a 6/12 visual acuity threshold) by 2030. This study models global and regional estimates of eREC as a baseline for the WHO initiative., Methods: The Vision Loss Expert Group analysed data from 565 448 participants of 169 population-based eye surveys conducted since 2000 to calculate eREC (met need/[met need + undermet need + unmet need]). A binary logistic regression model was used to estimate eREC by Global Burden of Disease (GBD) Study super region among adults aged 50 years and older., Findings: In 2021, distance eREC was 79·1% (95% CI 72·4-85·0) in the high-income super region; 62·1% (54·7-68·8) in north Africa and Middle East; 49·5% (45·0-54·0) in central Europe, eastern Europe, and central Asia; 40·0% (31·7-48·2) in southeast Asia, east Asia, and Oceania; 34·5% (29·4-40·0) in Latin America and the Caribbean; 9·0% (6·5-12·0) in south Asia; and 5·7% (3·1-9·0) in sub-Saharan Africa. eREC was higher in men and reduced with increasing age. Global distance eREC increased from 2000 to 2021 by 19·0%. Global near vision eREC for 2021 was 20·5% (95% CI 17·8-24·4)., Interpretation: Over the past 20 years, distance eREC has increased in each super region yet the WHO target will require substantial improvements in quantity and quality of refractive services in particular for near vision impairment., Funding: WHO, Sightsavers, The Fred Hollows Foundation, Fondation Thea, Brien Holden Vision Institute, Lions Clubs International Foundation., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests JR reports university position funding by Buchanan Charitable Foundation, New Zealand. KSN reports employment by OneSight EssilorLuxottica Foundation. JMF reports research grants from Lions SightFirst & Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico, Brazil. Tecnológico, Brazil. ​RV reports the Los Angeles Latino Eye Study research grant from the National Eye Institute, where he participates on a Data Monitoring Board or Advisory Board. The remaining authors declare no competing interests. The remaining authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Data on myopia prevalence and progression in European children are sparse. The aim of this work was to evaluate the progression of myopia in children and teenagers in a large prospective study., Methods: A prospective study involving a nationwide cohort. Myopia was defined as a spherical equivalent (SE) of ≤ -0.50 diopters (D). Data on refractive error, gender and age were collected in 696 optical centres in France between 2013 and 2019, including 136 333 children (4-17 years old) in the analysis.Progression of myopia was assessed between the first visit and the last visit over up to 6.5 years., Results: Mean age was 11.3±3.8 years (55.0% of female). The proportion of children progressing more than -0.50 D per year was higher in age groups 7-9 years and 10-12 years and in children with SE ≤ -4.00 D at first visit, representing 33.1%, 29.4% and 30.0% of these groups, respectively. In multivariate analysis, progression during the first 11-24 months was higher in the 7-9 and 10-12 age groups (-0.43 D and -0.42 D, respectively), for higher SE at baseline (at least -0.33 D for SE ≤ -1 D) and for girls (-0.35 D)., Conclusion: This is the first French epidemiological study to investigate myopia progression in a large-scale cohort of children. Sex, age groups and myopia severity are associated with differing rates of progression., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: A variety of shared care models have been developed, which aim to stratify glaucoma patients according to risk of disease progression. However, there is limited published data on the rate of glaucoma progression in the hospital vs community setting. Here we aimed to compare rates of glaucomatous visual field progression in the Cambridge Community Optometrist Glaucoma Scheme (COGS) and Addenbrooke's Hospital Glaucoma Clinic (AGC)., Methods: A retrospective comparative cohort review was performed. Patients with five or more visual field tests were included. Zeiss Forum software was used to calculate the MD progression rate (dB/year). Loss of sight years (LSY) were also calculated for both COGS and AGC., Results: Overall, 8465 visual field tests from 854 patients were reviewed. In all, 362 eyes from the AGC group and 210 eyes from COGS were included. The MD deterioration rate was significantly lower in the COGS patients compared with the AGC group (-0.1 vs -0.3 dB/year; p < 0.0001). No patients in the COGS group were predicted to become blind within their lifetime by LSY analysis. Fifteen patients were at risk in the AGC group., Conclusion: This service evaluation shows that COGS is an effective scheme to stratify lower risk glaucoma patients, increasing the capacity within hospital eye services. COGS patients have a lower rate of visual field deterioration compared to AGC patients. Effective communication between community and tertiary schemes is essential to facilitate transfer of patients requiring further hospital management reliably and efficiently, with the potential for low-risk patients to be followed safely in the community., (© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to The Royal College of Ophthalmologists.)

Background: Excessive use of digital smart devices, including smartphones and tablet computers, could be a risk factor for myopia. We aimed to review the literature on the association between digital smart device use and myopia., Methods: In this systematic review and meta-analysis we searched MEDLINE and Embase, and manually searched reference lists for primary research articles investigating smart device (ie, smartphones and tablets) exposure and myopia in children and young adults (aged 3 months to 33 years) from database inception to June 2 (MEDLINE) and June 3 (Embase), 2020. We included studies that investigated myopia-related outcomes of prevalent or incident myopia, myopia progression rate, axial length, or spherical equivalent. Studies were excluded if they were reviews or case reports, did not investigate myopia-related outcomes, or did not investigate risk factors for myopia. Bias was assessed with the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklists for analytical cross-sectional and cohort studies. We categorised studies as follows: category one studies investigated smart device use independently; category two studies investigated smart device use in combination with computer use; and category three studies investigated smart device use with other near-vision tasks that were not screen-based. We extracted unadjusted and adjusted odds ratios (ORs), β coefficients, prevalence ratios, Spearman's correlation coefficients, and p values for associations between screen time and incident or prevalent myopia. We did a meta-analysis of the association between screen time and prevalent or incident myopia for category one articles alone and for category one and two articles combined. Random-effects models were used when study heterogeneity was high (I 2 >50%) and fixed-effects models were used when heterogeneity was low (I 2 ≤50%)., Findings: 3325 articles were identified, of which 33 were included in the systematic review and 11 were included in the meta-analysis. Four (40%) of ten category one articles, eight (80%) of ten category two articles, and all 13 category three articles used objective measures to identify myopia (refraction), whereas the remaining studies used questionnaires to identify myopia. Screen exposure was measured by use of questionnaires in all studies, with one also measuring device-recorded network data consumption. Associations between screen exposure and prevalent or incident myopia, an increased myopic spherical equivalent, and longer axial length were reported in five (50%) category one and six (60%) category two articles. Smart device screen time alone (OR 1·26 [95% CI 1·00-1·60]; I 2 =77%) or in combination with computer use (1·77 [1·28-2·45]; I 2 =87%) was significantly associated with myopia. The most common sources of risk of bias were that all 33 studies did not include reliable measures of screen time, seven (21%) did not objectively measure myopia, and nine (27%) did not identify or adjust for confounders in the analysis. The high heterogeneity between studies included in the meta-analysis resulted from variability in sample size (range 155-19 934 participants), the mean age of participants (3-16 years), the standard error of the estimated odds of prevalent or incident myopia (0·02-2·21), and the use of continuous (six [55%] of 11) versus categorical (five [46%]) screen time variables INTERPRETATION: Smart device exposure might be associated with an increased risk of myopia. Research with objective measures of screen time and myopia-related outcomes that investigates smart device exposure as an independent risk factor is required., Funding: None., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests JF, ATS, and DF are employees of Plano. AP was an employee of Plano at the time of writing. JC is a shareholder in Plano. MD is the co-founder, a shareholder, and the current managing director of Plano. Plano is a health technology start-up that was created as part of the Singapore Eye Research Institute-Singapore National Eye Centre Ophthalmic Technologies Incubator Programme to develop evidence-based technological and educational solutions to address the global burden of myopia. In accordance with policies of the Singapore National Eye Centre, TYW has received grants, contracts, consulting fees, honoraria, and travel support from, and has participated on advisory boards for Allergan, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eden Ophthalmic, Genentech, Iveric Bio, Merck, Novartis, Oxurion (ThromboGenics), Roche, Samsung, Shanghai Henlius, and Zhaoke Pharmaceutical. TYW is the co-founder of Plano and EyRiS. The commercial relationships have not influenced the methods used in this study. All evidence has been presented and appraised in a balanced manner, and all data have been collected and analysed rigorously and without bias. DSWT, MGH, and RRAB declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: The prevalence of myopia is increasing around the world, stimulating interest in methods to slow its progression. The primary justification for slowing myopia progression is to reduce the risk of vision loss through sight-threatening ocular pathologic features in later life. The article analyzes whether the potential benefits of slowing myopia progression by 1 diopter (D) justify the potential risks associated with treatments., Methods: First, the known risks associated with various methods of myopia control are summarized, with emphasis on contact lens wear. Based on available data, the risk of visual impairment and predicted years of visual impairment are estimated for a range of incidence levels. Next, the increased risk of potentially sight-threatening conditions associated with different levels of myopia are reviewed. Finally, a model of the risk of visual impairment as a function of myopia level is developed, and the years of visual impairment associated with various levels of myopia and the years of visual impairment that could be prevented with achievable levels of myopia control are estimated., Results: Assuming an incidence of microbial keratitis between 1 and 25 per 10 000 patient-years and that 15% of cases result in vision loss leads to the conclusion that between 38 and 945 patients need to be exposed to 5 years of wear to produce 5 years of vision loss. Each additional 1 D of myopia is associated with a 58%, 20%, 21%, and 30% increase in the risk of myopic maculopathy, open-angle glaucoma, posterior subcapsular cataract, and retinal detachment, respectively. The predicted mean years of visual impairment ranges from 4.42 in a person with myopia of -3 D to 9.56 in a person with myopia of -8 D, and a 1-D reduction would lower these by 0.74 and 1.21 years, respectively., Conclusions: The potential benefits of myopia control outweigh the risks: the number needed to treat to prevent 5 years of visual impairment is between 4.1 and 6.8, whereas fewer than 1 in 38 will experience a loss of vision as a result of myopia control., (Copyright © 2021 American Academy of Ophthalmology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: There is a relative paucity of self-reported vision problems data in European countries., Methods: In this context, we investigated self-reported vision problems through European Health Interview Survey 2, a cross-sectional European population survey based on a standardized questionnaire including 147 medical, demographic and socioeconomic variables applied to non-institutionalized individuals aged 15 years or more in 28 European countries, in addition to Iceland and Norway., Results: The survey included 311 386 individuals (54.18% women), with overall crude prevalence of self-reported vision problems of 2.07% [95% CI; 2.01-2.14]. Among them, 1.70 % [1.61-1.78] of men, 2.41% [2.31-2.51] of women and 4.71% [4.53-4.89] of individuals aged 60 or more reported to have a lot of vision problems or to be not able to see. The frequency of self-reported vision problems was the highest in Eastern European countries with values of 2.43% [2.30-2.56]. In multivariate analyses, limiting long-standing illness, depression, daily smoking, lack of physical activity, lower educational level and social isolation were associated with self-reported vision problems with ORs of 2.66 [2.42-2.92], 2.16 [2.01-2.32], 1.11 [1.01-1.23], 1.31 [1.21-1.42], 1.29 [1.19-1.40] and 1.45 [1.26-1.67], respectively, while higher income was associated with less self-reported vision problems with OR of 0.80 [0.73-0.86]., Conclusions: This study demonstrated inequalities in terms of prevalence of self-reported vision problems in Europe, with higher prevalence in Eastern European countries and among women and older individuals., (© 2020 The Authors. Acta Ophthalmologica published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Acta OphthalmologicaScandinavica Foundation.)

Background: This study aimed to assess the prevalence and causes of vision loss in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) in 2015, compared with prior years, and to estimate expected values for 2020., Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis assessed the prevalence of blindness (presenting distance visual acuity <3/60 in the better eye), moderate and severe vision impairment (MSVI; presenting distance visual acuity <6/18 but ≥3/60) and mild vision impairment (MVI; presenting distance visual acuity <6/12 and ≥6/18), and also near vision impairment (

Introduction: Vision impairment (VI) places a burden on individuals, health systems and society in general. In order to support the case for investing in eye health services, an updated cost of illness study that measures the global impact of VI is necessary. To perform such a study, a systematic review of the literature is needed. Here we outline the protocol for a systematic review to describe and summarise the costs associated with VI and its major causes., Methods and Analysis: We will systematically search in Medline (Ovid) and the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination database which includes the National Health Service Economics Evaluation Database. No language or geographical restriction will be applied. Additional literature will be identified by reviewing the references in the included studies and by contacting field experts. Grey literature will be considered. The review will include any study published from 1 January 2000 to November 2019 that provides information about costs of illness, burden of disease and/or loss of well-being in participants with VI due to an unspecified cause or due to one of the seven leading causes globally.Two reviewers will independently screen studies and extract relevant data from included studies. Methodological quality of economic studies will be assessed based on the British Medical Journal checklist for economic submissions adapted to costs of illness studies. This protocol has been prepared following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis protocols and has been published prospectively in Open Science Framework., Ethics and Dissemination: Formal ethical approval is not required, as primary data will not be collected in this review. The findings of this study will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications, stakeholder meetings and inclusion in the ongoing Lancet Global Health Commission on Global Eye Health. REGISTRATION DETAILS: https://osf.io/9au3w (DOI 10.17605/OSF.IO/6F8VM)., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

Background: To determine the prevalence and causes of blindness and vision impairment (VI) in East Asia in 2015 and to forecast the trend to 2020., Methods: Through a systematic literature review and meta-analysis, we estimated prevalence of blindness (presenting visual acuity <3/60 in the better eye), moderate-to-severe vision impairment (MSVI; 3/60≤presenting visual acuity <6/18), mild vision impairment (mild VI: 6/18≤presenting visual acuity <6/12) and uncorrected presbyopia for 1990, 2010, 2015 and 2020. A total of 44 population-based studies were included., Results: In 2015, age-standardised prevalence of blindness, MSVI, mild VI and uncorrected presbyopia was 0.37% (80% uncertainty interval (UI) 0.12%-0.68%), 3.06% (80% UI 1.35%-5.16%) and 2.65% (80% UI 0.92%-4.91%), 32.91% (80% UI 18.72%-48.47%), respectively, in East Asia. Cataract was the leading cause of blindness (43.6%), followed by uncorrected refractive error (12.9%), glaucoma, age-related macular degeneration, corneal diseases, trachoma and diabetic retinopathy (DR). The leading cause for MSVI was uncorrected refractive error, followed by cataract, age-related macular degeneration, glaucoma, corneal disease, trachoma and DR. The burden of VI due to uncorrected refractive error, cataracts, glaucoma and DR has continued to rise over the decades reported., Conclusions: Addressing the public healthcare barriers for cataract and uncorrected refractive error can help eliminate almost 57% of all blindness cases in this region. Therefore, public healthcare efforts should be focused on effective screening and effective patient education, with access to high-quality healthcare., Competing Interests: Competing interests: JBJ: Consultant for Mundipharma Co. (Cambridge, UK); Patent holder with Biocompatibles UK Ltd. (Farnham, Surrey, UK) (Title: Treatment of eye diseases using encapsulated cells encoding and secreting neuroprotective factor and/or anti-angiogenic factor; Patent number: 20120263794), and Patent application with University of Heidelberg (Heidelberg, Germany) (Title: Agents for use in the therapeutic or prophylactic treatment of myopia or hyperopia; Europäische Patentanmeldung 15 000 771.4). JHK: consultant for Gilead (DSMC Chair), Santen (protocol design). SR: consultant for Brien Holden Vision Institute., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Purpose of Review: To describe the VISION 2020: The Right to Sight, global initiative for the elimination of avoidable blindness, the contribution of glaucoma to the magnitude of global blindness and priorities going forward., Recent Findings: Although the target of the World Health Organization's Global Action Plan (2014-2019) has not been met in terms of 25% reduction in avoidable blindness, there is evidence that the contribution of glaucoma to blindness and vision impairment is reducing. Yet this focus on a threshold of visual acuity by which to measure prevalence underestimates the true burden of glaucoma. Recent population-based studies demonstrate the scale of the unmet need., Summary: Scaling up of integrated people-centered eye care, by embedding glaucoma detection and care pathways in health systems with a strong focus on primary healthcare, is necessary. Solutions include reinforcing existing pathways while emphasizing high-quality glaucoma care, in addition to novel solutions such as self-testing, digital portable technology, artificial intelligence, and multilevel care pathways that extend to the most underserved parts of the global community.

Aim: To estimate the prevalence, causes and risk factors for presenting distance and near vision impairment (VI) in Trinidad and Tobago., Methods: This is a national, population-based survey using multistage, cluster random sampling in 120 clusters with probability-proportionate-to-size methods. Stage 1 included standardised, community-based measurement of visual acuity. Stage 2 invited all 4263 people aged ≥40 years for comprehensive clinic-based assessment. The Moorfields Eye Hospital Reading Centre graded fundus photographs and optical coherence tomography images independently., Results: The response rates were 84.2% (n=3589) (stage 1) and 65.4% (n=2790) (stage 2), including 97.1% with VI. The mean age was 57.2 (SD 11.9) years, 54.5% were female, 42.6% were of African descent and 39.0% were of South Asian descent. 11.88% (95% CI 10.88 to 12.97, n=468) had distance VI (logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution [logMAR] >0.30), including blindness (logMAR >1.30) in 0.73% (95% CI 0.48 to 0.97, n=31), after adjustment for study design, non-response, age, sex and municipality. The leading causes of blindness included glaucoma (31.7%, 95% CI 18.7 to 44.8), cataract (28.8%, 95% CI 12.6 to 45.1) and diabetic retinopathy (19.1%, 95% CI 4.2 to 34.0). The leading cause of distance VI was uncorrected refractive error (47.4%, 95% CI 43.4 to 51.3). Potentially avoidable VI accounted for 86.1% (95% CI 82.88 to 88.81), an estimated 176 323 cases in the national population aged ≥40 years. 22.3% (95% CI 20.7 to 23.8, n=695) had uncorrected near VI (logMAR >0.30 at 40 cm with distance acuity <0.30). Significant independent associations with distance VI included increasing age, diagnosed diabetes and unemployment. Significant independent associations with near VI included male sex, no health insurance and unemployment., Conclusions: Trinidad and Tobago's burden of avoidable VI exceeds that of other high-income countries. Population and health system priorities are identified to help close the gap., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background/aims: To determine whether self-reported illness perceptions in newly diagnosed patients with primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG) and ocular hypertension (OHT) are more negative compared with peers who have lived with their diagnosis for more than 2 years., Methods: A cross-sectional study of 58 newly diagnosed patients with POAG and OHT recruited at their first clinic visit. Electronic patient records were used to identify similar patients (n=58, related by age and severity of visual field loss) who had their diagnosis for >2 years. All participants completed the Brief Illness Perception Questionnaire (BIPQ), EQ5D general health measure and Type D Personality Scale (DS14)., Results: Average BIPQ scores were similar for people newly diagnosed with POAG and POAG diagnosed >2 years and were no different to newly diagnosed OHT and OHT diagnosed >2 years POAG (p=0.46). An analysis correcting for personality type (DS14) and general health (EQ5D) indicated newly diagnosed patients with POAG to have marginally better illness perceptions on individual BIPQ items quantifying impact on life in general, experience of symptoms and 'understanding' of their condition (all p<0.01). In contrast, patients with POAG with a diagnosis >2 years understood better their condition to be long-term (p<0.01)., Conclusions: Some illness perceptions differed between newly diagnosed people and patients living with their diagnosis for >2 years. Illness perception for people with manifest glaucoma and at risk of glaucoma (OHT) were similar; the latter might benefit from an intervention at diagnosis that highlights the better prognosis for OHT compared with POAG., Competing Interests: Competing interests: LM, TB, CA, RRAB, PT: None declared. DPC: Allergan, Santen (Recipient of Speaker fees), Roche (Financial Support), CenterVue (Consultant)., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: A patient's perception of how their glaucoma is managed will influence both adherence to their medication and outcome measures such as quality of life., Methods: Prospective consecutive study using a Glaucoma Patient-reported Outcome and Experience Measure (POEM) modified for an Australian ophthalmic private clinical practice setting. The Australian Glaucoma POEM consists of eight items related to the patient's understanding of the diagnosis and management, acceptability of the treatment, whether they feel their glaucoma is getting worse, interfering with their daily life and concerns regarding loss of vision as well as addressing whether they feel safe under the care of their glaucoma team and how well their care is organised., Results: Two hundred and two patients (M:F 91:111) participated in the study. Mean ± standard deviation for subject age was 69 ± 13 years. Patient's overall perception of their treatment and outcome was favourable. Younger patients felt their glaucoma interfered more with their daily lives and were more worried about losing vision from glaucoma. The greater the number of medications in use, the more they felt their glaucoma was getting worse and that glaucoma interfered with their daily lives. With all other variables accounted for by the multivariate linear model, female patients more strongly agreed that they understood their glaucoma diagnosis and glaucoma management. The patients with a severe visual defect in their worse eye, reported a greater perceived understanding of their glaucoma diagnosis and management and that they felt that glaucoma had a greater interference on their daily life. They were also more concerned about losing vision from glaucoma than their fellow glaucoma patients with less severe or no visual field deficit in the worse eye., Conclusions: The modified POEM demonstrates potential to capture the concerns of a practice's glaucoma cohort with a view to enhancing the quality of glaucoma care delivered.

Background: To assess prevalence and causes of vision impairment in South-east Asia and Oceania regions from 1990 to 2015 and to forecast the figures for 2020., Methods: Based on a systematic review of medical literature, prevalence of blindness (presenting visual acuity (PVA) <3/60 in the better eye), moderate and severe vision impairment (MSVI; PVA <6/18 but ≥3/60), mild vision impairment (PVA <6/12 but ≥6/18) and near vision impairment (>N5 or N8 in the presence of normal vision) were estimated for 1990, 2010, 2015 and 2020., Results: The age-standardised prevalence of blindness for all ages and both genders was higher in the Oceania region but lower for MSVI when comparing the subregions. The prevalence of near vision impairment in people≥50 years was 41% (uncertainty interval (UI) 18.8 to 65.9). Comparison of the data for 2015 with 2020 predicts a small increase in the numbers of people affected by blindness, MSVI and mild VI in both subregions. The numbers predicted for near VI in South-east Asia are from 90.68 million in 2015 to 102.88 million in 2020. The main causes of blindness and MSVI in both subregions in 2015 were cataract, uncorrected refractive error, glaucoma, corneal disease and age-related macular degeneration. There was no trachoma in Oceania from 1990 and decreasing prevalence in South-east Asia with elimination predicted by 2020., Conclusions: In both regions, the main challenges for eye care come from cataract which remains the main cause of blindness with uncorrected refractive error the main cause of MSVI. The trend between 1990 and 2015 is for a lower prevalence of blindness and MSVI in both regions., Competing Interests: Competing interests: JBJ: Consultant for Mundipharma Co. (Cambridge, UK); Patent holder with Biocompatibles UK Ltd. (Farnham, Surrey, UK) (Title: Treatment of eye diseases using encapsulated cells encoding and secreting neuroprotective factor and/or ant-angiogenic factor; Patent number: 20120263794), and Patent application with University of Heidelberg (Heidelberg, Germany) (Title: Agents for use in the therapeutic or prophylactic treatment of myopia or hyperopia; Europäische Patentanmeldung 15 000 771.4., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objective: To estimate the prevalence and causes of blindness and vision impairment for distance and near in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) in 2015 and to forecast trends to 2020., Methods: A meta-analysis from a global systematic review of 283 cross-sectional, population-representative studies from published and unpublished sources from 1980 to 2014 in the Global Vision Database included 17 published and 6 unpublished studies from LAC., Results: In 2015, across LAC, age-standardised prevalence was 0.38% in all ages and 1.56% in those over age 50 for blindness; 2.06% in all ages and 7.86% in those over age 50 for moderate and severe vision impairment (MSVI); 1.89% in all ages and 6.93% in those over age 50 for mild vision impairment and 39.59% in all ages and 45.27% in those over 50 for near vision impairment (NVI). In 2015, 117.86 million persons were vision impaired; of those 2.34 million blind, 12.46 million with MSVI, 11.34 million mildly impaired and 91.72 million had NVI. Cataract is the most common cause of blindness. Undercorrected refractive-error is the most common cause of vision impairment., Conclusions: These prevalence estimates indicate that one in five persons across LAC had some degree of vision loss in 2015. We predict that from 2015 to 2020, the absolute numbers of persons with vision loss will increase by 12% to 132.33 million, while the all-age age-standardised prevalence will decrease for blindness by 15% and for other distance vision impairment by 8%. All countries need epidemiologic research to establish accurate national estimates and trends. Universal eye health services must be included in universal health coverage reforms to address disparities, fragmentation and segmentation of healthcare., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: To assess the prevalence and causes of vision impairment in North Africa and the Middle East (NAME) from 1990 to 2015 and to forecast projections for 2020., Methods: Based on a systematic review of medical literature, the prevalence of blindness (presenting visual acuity (PVA) <3/60 in the better eye), moderate and severe vision impairment (MSVI; PVA <6/18 but ≥3/60) and mild vision impairment (PVA <6/12 but ≥6/18) was estimated for 2015 and 2020., Results: The age-standardised prevalence of blindness and MSVI for all ages and genders decreased from 1990 to 2015, from 1.72 (0.53-3.13) to 0.95% (0.32%-1.71%), and from 6.66 (3.09-10.69) to 4.62% (2.21%-7.33%), respectively, with slightly higher figures for women than men. Cataract was the most common cause of blindness in 1990 and 2015, followed by uncorrected refractive error. Uncorrected refractive error was the leading cause of MSVI in the NAME region in 1990 and 2015, followed by cataract. A reduction in the proportions of blindness and MSVI due to cataract, corneal opacity and trachoma is predicted by 2020. Conversely, an increase in the proportion of blindness attributable to uncorrected refractive error, glaucoma, age-related macular degeneration and diabetic retinopathy is expected., Conclusions: In 2015 cataract and uncorrected refractive error were the major causes of vision loss in the NAME region. Proportions of vision impairment from cataract, corneal opacity and trachoma are expected to decrease by 2020, and those from uncorrected refractive error, glaucoma, diabetic retinopathy and age-related macular degeneration are predicted to increase by 2020., Competing Interests: Competing interests: JBJ: consultant for Mundipharma (Cambridge, UK); patent holder with Biocompatibles UK (Farnham, Surrey, UK) (Title: Treatment of eye diseases using encapsulated cells encoding and secreting neuroprotective factor and/or antiangiogenic factor; patent number: 20120263794) and patent application with the University of Heidelberg (Heidelberg, Germany) (Title: Agents for use in the therapeutic or prophylactic treatment of myopia or hyperopia; Europäische Patentanmeldung 15 000 771.4). JHK: consultant for Gilead and Santen. SR: consultant for Brien Holden Vision Institute., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: To assess prevalence and causes of vision loss in Central and South Asia., Methods: A systematic review of medical literature assessed the prevalence of blindness (presenting visual acuity<3/60 in the better eye), moderate and severe vision impairment (MSVI; presenting visual acuity <6/18 but ≥3/60) and mild vision impairment (MVI; presenting visual acuity <6/12 and ≥6/18) in Central and South Asia for 1990, 2010, 2015 and 2020., Results: In Central and South Asia combined, age-standardised prevalences of blindness, MSVI and MVI in 2015 were for men and women aged 50+years, 3.72% (80% uncertainty interval (UI): 1.39-6.75) and 4.00% (80% UI: 1.41-7.39), 16.33% (80% UI: 8.55-25.47) and 17.65% (80% UI: 9.00-27.62), 11.70% (80% UI: 4.70-20.32) and 12.25% (80% UI:4.86-21.30), respectively, with a significant decrease in the study period for both gender. In South Asia in 2015, 11.76 million individuals (32.65% of the global blindness figure) were blind and 61.19 million individuals (28.3% of the global total) had MSVI. From 1990 to 2015, cataract (accounting for 36.58% of all cases with blindness in 2015) was the most common cause of blindness, followed by undercorrected refractive error (36.43%), glaucoma (5.81%), age-related macular degeneration (2.44%), corneal diseases (2.43%), diabetic retinopathy (0.16%) and trachoma (0.04%). For MSVI in South Asia 2015, most common causes were undercorrected refractive error (accounting for 66.39% of all cases with MSVI), followed by cataract (23.62%), age-related macular degeneration (1.31%) and glaucoma (1.09%)., Conclusions: One-third of the global blind resided in South Asia in 2015, although the age-standardised prevalence of blindness and MSVI decreased significantly between 1990 and 2015., Competing Interests: Competing interests: JBJ is the patent holder with Biocompatibles UK (Farnham, Surrey, UK) (Title: Treatment of eye diseases using encapsulated cells encoding and secreting neuroprotective factor and / or anti-angiogenic factor; Patent number: 20120263794) and Patent application with University of Heidelberg (Heidelberg, Germany) (Title: Agents for use in the therapeutic or prophylactic treatment of myopia or hyperopia; Europäische Patentanmeldung 15 000 771.4. SR is the consultant for Brien Holden Vision Institute., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objectives: Bimatoprost-timolol (bimatoprost 0.03%-timolol 0.5% fixed-dose combination [FDC]) and tafluprost-timolol (tafluprost 0.0015%-timolol 0.5% FDC) eye drops are currently the only topical intraocular pressure (IOP)-reducing therapies available as preservative-free (PF) prostaglandin and timolol FDC. The aim of this study was to investigate changes to ocular signs and symptoms when patients with ocular hypertension (OH) or open-angle glaucoma (OAG) switched from PF or benzalkonium chloride (BAK)-preserved bimatoprost-timolol to PF tafluprost-timolol eye drops., Design: This was a 12-week, open-label, phase IV study., Setting: Sixteen centres in Finland, Germany, Italy and the UK., Participants: Patients with OH or OAG (IOP on medication ≤21 mm Hg), treated with PF or BAK-preserved bimatoprost-timolol for ≥4 weeks before screening, and presenting with conjunctival hyperaemia and ≥1 ocular symptom., Interventions: Patients were switched to PF tafluprost-timolol once daily in the treated eye(s)., Primary and Secondary Outcome Measures: The primary endpoints were change from screening to week 12 in conjunctival hyperaemia and worst ocular symptom. The secondary outcome measures were changes from screening in ocular signs (other than conjunctival hyperaemia) and symptoms at week 12., Results: Of 123 enrolled patients, 121 were included in the intention-to-treat dataset, of which all were Caucasian and 54.5% were female; 76 patients used BAK-preserved bimatoprost-timolol and 45 used PF drops. Conjunctival hyperaemia and severity of worst ocular symptom following switch to PF tafluprost-timolol significantly reduced from screening to week 12 in all patients (p<0.001). The percentage of patients with ocular signs and symptoms was significantly reduced at week 12 compared with screening (p<0.001). IOP was not affected by the change of treatment., Conclusions: Switching from BAK-preserved or PF bimatoprost-timolol to tafluprost-timolol reduced both signs and symptoms of ocular surface disease with no clinically relevant effect on IOP., Trial Registration Number: EudraCT2014-005273-37; Results., Competing Interests: Competing interests: RRAB has received travel expenses from Santen. KK has received a consultant fee from Santen for an advisory board. KL has no conflicts of interest to report. CET has received department funding for the conduction of this study, personal fees and non-financial support from Santen not related to this study or manuscript, and department funding from Novartis and Allergan. JV has received fees for statistical services from Santen. AR is an employee at Santen Oy., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Purpose: To report on the composition and performance of the portfolio of Ophthalmology research studies in the United Kingdom's National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Clinical Research Network (UK CRN)., Methods: Ophthalmology studies open to recruitment between 1 April 2010 and 31 March 2018 were classified by: sub-specialty, participant age, gender of Chief Investigator, involvement of genetic investigations, commercial/ non-commercial, interventional/observational design. Frequency distributions for each covariate and temporal variation in recruitment to time and target were analysed., Results: Over 8 years, 137,377 participants were recruited (average of 15,457 participants/year; range: 5485-32,573) with growth by year in proportion of commercial studies and hospital participation in England (76% in 2017/18). Fourteen percent of studies had a genetic component and most studies (82%) included only adults. The majority of studies (41%) enrolled patients with retinal diseases, followed by glaucoma (17%), anterior segment and cataract (13%), and ocular inflammation (6%). Overall, 68% of non-commercial studies and 55% of commercial studies recruited within the anticipated time set by the study and also recruited to or exceeded the target number of participants., Conclusions: High levels of clinical research activity, growth and improved performance have been observed in Ophthalmology in UK over the past 8 years. Some sub-specialties that carry substantial morbidity and a very high burden on NHS services are underrepresented and deserve more patient-centred research. Yet the NIHR and its CRN Ophthalmology National Specialty Group has enabled key steps in achieving the goal of embedding research into every day clinical care.