Search

Background: Myopia (near-sightedness) is increasing worldwide, especially in Asia. The aim of this study was to describe trends in the prevalence of myopia in Germany., Methods: We analyzed data from the German Health Interview and Examination Survey for Children and Adolescents (KiGGS; baseline survey 2003-2006, N = 17 640; wave 2, 2014-2017, N = 15 023). The presence of myopia was determined from a parent questionnaire and validated by the use of a visual aid. The population prevalence of myopia was calculated. Based on the KiGGS wave 2 data, potential risk factors for myopia were identified by means of logistic regression., Results: The prevalence of myopia at the age of 0-17 years in Germany was 11.6% (95% confidence interval [11.0; 12.2]) in the period 2003-2006 and 11.4% [10.7; 12.2] in 2014-2017. No age group of either sex exhibited a relevant, statistically significant change in the prevalence of myopia. In the adjusted model (adjusted for age, sex, family socioeconomic status, family history of migration), no association was found between myopia and use of digital media. More time spent reading books was associated with myopia: reading for more than 2 h/day showed an odds ratio of 1.69 [1.3; 2.2]., Conclusion: The prevalence of myopia in children and adolescents in Germany has remained virtually unchanged over a period of approximately 10 years. Changes in media consumption, such as the increased use of smartphones in this age group, have therefore had no detectable impact on the development of myopia, at least not so far. Future studies should investigate the influences of further increases in media use and examine the long-term effects.

Background: The distribution of visual impairment is an indicator of the health status of the population and for the frequency of diseases of the eye., Methods: The Gutenberg Health Study (GHS) is a population-based cohort study in Germany concerning adults aged 35 to 74. 15 010 subjects from the Mainz-Bingen region underwent general medical and ophthalmological examination, with measurement of the distance-corrected visual acuity in each eye separately. As per the World Health Organization criteria, visual impairment was defined as an acuity below 0.3 in the better eye, and blindness as an acuity below 0.05. All patients who were found to be visually impaired or blind underwent further individual study with clinical history-taking, split-lamp examination, and fundus photography., Results: Data from 14 687 subjects were evaluated. The mean age of the partici- pants was 55.0 years (standard deviation, 11.1 years). The prevalence of visual im- pairment was 0.37% (95% confidence interval [0.28; 0.49]) (n = 55) and was higher in women (0.44%) than in men (0.31%). Blindness was present in 0.05% [0.03; 0.11] (n = 8) of the subjects. The prevalence of visual impairment from age 65 on- ward was 0.79%, three times higher than in the younger age groups. 54.5% of the visually impaired subjects had multiple underlying ophthalmological pathologies., Conclusion: The causes of visual impairment are manifold. Loss of vision is often the combined effect of multiple pathological factors. The etiology of visual impair- ment is thus a more complex matter than is commonly assumed.

Background: Amblyopia is due to insufficient development of the visual system in early childhood and is a major source of lifelong impairment of visual acuity. Too little is known about the prevalence of amblyopia in Germany and the frequency of its various causes., Methods: The Gutenberg Health Study of the University of Mainz Faculty of Medicine is an ongoing population-based, prospective, monocentric cohort study with 15 010 participants aged 35 to 74. All participants are examined for the presence of ocular, cardiovascular, neoplastic, metabolic, immunologic, and mental diseases. 3227 participants aged 35 to 44 underwent ophthalmological examination from 2007 to 2012. Amblyopia was defined as impaired visual acuity in the absence of any organic pathology capable of explaining the condition, and in the presence of a known risk factor for amblyopia., Results: Amblyopia, when defined as a visual acuity less than or equal to 0.63, was present in 182 participants (5.6%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 4.9-6.5%), 120 of whom had a visual acuity less than or equal to 0.5 (3.7%, 95% CI 3.3-5.2%). A narrower definition of amblyopia requiring, in addition, an interocular difference in acuity of at least two lines yielded slightly lower prevalence figures: 5.0% (95% CI 4.2-5.8%) and 3.7% (95% CI 3.1-4.4%), respectively. The causes of amblyopia (visual acuity ≤ 0.63) were anisometropia (different refractive strengths of the two eyes) in 49% of participants, strabismus (a squint) in 23%, both of these factors in 17%, and visual deprivation in 2%. 3 patients (2%) had relative amblyopia due to a traumatic cataract sustained in early childhood. 7% of the participants with amblyopia had binocular amblyopia., Conclusion: This study yielded a prevalence figure of 5.6% for amblyopia in Germany-a higher figure than in other, comparable population-based studies, which have generally yielded figures of ca. 3% for visual acuity ≤ 0.63. The distribution of the causes of amblyopia is similar across studies.