Ophthalmology (Eye & Ear Hospital) - Research Publications
Permanent URI for this collection
Search Results
1 - 10 of 13
-
ItemUtilization of eye health-care services in Australia: the National Eye Health Survey(WILEY, 2018-04)IMPORTANCE: National data on eye health-care service utilization will inform Australia's eye health policy. BACKGROUND: To investigate the utilization of eye health-care services by Australians. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey. PARTICIPANTS: Indigenous Australians aged 40 years and older and non-Indigenous Australians aged 50 years and older. METHODS: One thousand seven hundred thirty-eight Indigenous Australians and 3098 non-Indigenous Australians were recruited from 30 randomly selected sites, stratified by remoteness. Sociodemographic, ocular history and eye health-care service utilization data were collected, and an eye examination was conducted. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Recentness of eye examinations, types of providers used and associated risk factors. RESULTS: Approximately 67.0% of Indigenous Australians and 82.5% of non-Indigenous Australians underwent an eye examination within the previous 2 years. Indigenous status (P < 0.001), male gender (P < 0.001), Outer Regional (P < 0.001) and Very Remote (P < 0.001) residence were associated with less recent examinations. Participants with >self-reported eye disease or diabetes were most likely to have been examined within the past year (P < 0.001). For Indigenous Australians, older age was associated with recent eye testing (P = 0.001). Those with retinal disease and cataract were more likely to see an ophthalmologist (P < 0.001), and those with refractive error were more likely to see an optometrist (P < 0.001). In Regional Australia, non-Indigenouspeople were more likely to see optometrists (P < 0.001), and Indigenous Australians were more likely to utilize other, non-specialistservices (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Eye examination frequency has improved in Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians compared with previous population-based research. Further improvements are required in risk groups including Indigenous Australians and those living in Regional and Remote areas.
-
ItemPrevalence of retinal vein occlusion in the Australian National Eye Health Survey(WILEY, 2018-04)IMPORTANCE: In Australia, knowledge of the epidemiology of retinal vein occlusion remains scarce because of a paucity of recent population-based data. The National Eye Health Survey (2015-2016) provides an up-to-date estimate of the prevalence of retinal vein occlusion in non-Indigenous and Indigenous Australian adults. BACKGROUND: To determine the prevalence and associations of retinal vein occlusion in a national sample of Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australian adults. DESIGN: Population-based cross-sectional study. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 3098 non-Indigenous Australians (aged 50-98 years) and 1738 Indigenous Australians (aged 40-92 years) living in 30 randomly selected sites, stratified by remoteness. METHODS: Retinal vein occlusions were graded from retinal photographs using standardized protocols and recorded as central retinal vein occlusion or branch retinal vein occlusion. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Prevalence of retinal vein occlusion. RESULTS: In the non-Indigenous population, the sampling weight adjusted prevalence of any retinal vein occlusion was 0.96% (95% confidence interval: 0.59, 1.6), with branch retinal vein occlusion observed in 0.72% (95% confidence interval: 0.41, 1.2) and central retinal vein occlusion in 0.24% (95% confidence interval: 0.13, 0.47). Any retinal vein occlusion was found in 0.91% (95% confidence interval: 0.47, 1.7) of Indigenous Australians aged 40 years and over, with branch retinal vein occlusion observed in 0.83% (95% confidence interval: 0.40, 1.7) and central retinal vein occlusion in 0.07% (95% confidence interval: 0.02, 0.32). Older age (odds ratio = 1.64 per 10 years, P = 0.006) and the presence of self-reported diabetes (odds ratio = 3.24, P = 0.006) were associated with any retinal vein occlusion after multivariable adjustments. Retinal vein occlusion was attributed as the cause of monocular vision loss (<6/12) in seven (0.25%) non-Indigenous and six (0.36%) Indigenous participants. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: These data suggest that retinal vein occlusion is relatively uncommon in the non-Indigenous Australians aged 50 years and over and Indigenous Australians aged 40 years and over. Similar to previous Australian and international reports, the prevalence of retinal vein occlusion rose sharply with age.
-
ItemPrevalence of trachomatous trichiasis in Australia: the National Eye Health Survey(WILEY, 2018-01)IMPORTANCE: Australia is the only developed country to still have pockets of endemic trachoma. The research provides up-to-date, population-based prevalence data of later complications of trachoma amongst a national sample of Indigenous adults. BACKGROUND: To report the prevalence of trachomatous trichiasis (TT) in Indigenous Australians aged 40 years and older. DESIGN: Population-based cross-sectional study. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 1738 (41% male) Indigenous Australians aged 40 years or older, living amongst 30 randomly selected Australian sites, stratified by remoteness. METHODS: Anterior segment examination was performed and trachoma grading for the presence of TT and corneal opacification (CO) was conducted using the WHO (WHO) simplified grading system. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Prevalence of TT. RESULTS: A total of three (0.17%) participants had TT, and there were no confirmed cases of trachomatous CO in the NEHS. All three participants with TT were female and aged 40 years or older. Although they had likely spent their childhoods in more remote areas, two of the three confirmed cases resided in an urban and outer regional area at the time of their examinations. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Our data are in line with ongoing national trachoma surveillance reports that suggest the prevalence of late sequences of trachoma appear to be decreasing in Australia.
-
Item
-
ItemSampling methodology and site selection in the National Eye Health Survey: an Australian population-based prevalence study(WILEY, 2017-05)BACKGROUND: This paper presents the sampling methodology of the National Eye Health Survey that aimed to determine the prevalence of vision impairment and blindness in Australia. DESIGN: The National Eye Health Survey is a cross-sectional population-based survey. PARTICIPANTS: Indigenous Australians aged 40 years and older and non-Indigenous Australians aged 50 years and older residing in all levels of geographic remoteness in Australia. METHODS: Using multistage, random-cluster sampling, 30 geographic areas were selected to provide samples of 3000 non-Indigenous Australians and 1400 Indigenous Australians. Sampling involved (i) selecting Statistical Area- Level 2 sites, stratified by remoteness; (ii) selecting Statistical Area- Level 1 sites within Statistical Area- Level 2 sites to provide targeted samples; and (iii) grouping of contiguous Statistical Area- Level 1 sites or replacing Statistical Area- Level 1 sites to provide sufficient samples. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The main outcome measures involved Sites sites selected and participants sampled in the survey. RESULTS: Thirty sites were generated, including 12 Major City sites, 6 Inner Regional sites, 6 Outer Regional sites, 4 Remote sites and 2 Very Remote sites. Three thousand ninety-eight non-Indigenous participants and 1738 Indigenous participants were recruited. Selection of Statistical Area- Level 1 site overestimated the number of eligible residents in all sites. About 20% (6/30) of Statistical Area- Level 1 sites were situated in non-residential bushland, and 26.67% (8/30) of Statistical Area- Level 1 populations had low eligibility or accessibility, requiring replacement. CONCLUSIONS: Representative samples of Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians were selected, recruited and tested, providing the first national data on the prevalence of vision impairment and blindness in Australia.
-
ItemPrevalence, associations and characteristics of severe uncorrected refractive error in the Australian National Eye Health Survey(WILEY, 2020-01)IMPORTANCE: In Australia, nationally representative data of the burden and associations of severe uncorrected refractive error are scarce. BACKGROUND: To report the prevalence and characteristics of severe uncorrected refractive error in Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians. DESIGN: Population-based cross-sectional study. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 3098 non-Indigenous Australians aged 50 to 98 and 1738 Indigenous Australians aged 40 to 92 living in 30 randomly selected Australian sites were examined. METHODS: Severe uncorrected refractive error was defined as an improvement of ≥2 lines on the logMAR chart in one or both eyes in participants with a presenting visual acuity <6/12. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Severe uncorrected refractive error RESULTS: Prevalence of severe uncorrected refractive error was 11.0% (95% confidence interval 9.3-13.0) in non-Indigenous and 14.5% (12.5-16.7) in Indigenous Australians. Eighty-two percent of non-Indigenous and 77% of Indigenous participants had a spherical equivalent refraction between -2.00D and +2.00D. Indigenous Australians who were older (odds ratio [OR] for 70-79 years vs 40-49 years = 3.59), resided in outer regional areas (OR = 1.78) and did not have an eye examination in the previous 2-years (OR = 1.50) were associated with higher odds of severe uncorrected refractive error. Geographical remoteness (OR = .68 for inner regional), male gender (OR = 1.30), older age (OR for 70-79 years vs 50-59 years = 1.51) and failure to have an eye examination in the previous 2-years (OR = 2.06) were associated with severe uncorrected refractive error among non-Indigenous participants. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Increased public awareness of the importance of regular optometric examinations may be required in groups at high risk of severe uncorrected refractive error.
-
ItemPrevalence and characteristics of choroidal nevi: the Australian National Eye Health Survey(WILEY, 2018-09)IMPORTANCE: Choroidal nevi are a common incidental finding on fundus examination. The National Eye Health Survey (NEHS, 2015-2016) provides an up-to-date estimate of the prevalence of choroidal nevi in non-Indigenous and Indigenous Australian adults. BACKGROUND: To describe the prevalence and characteristics of choroidal nevi among non-Indigenous and Indigenous Australian adults. DESIGN: Population-based cross-sectional study. PARTICIPANTS: This study included 3098 non-Indigenous Australians (aged 50-98 years) and 1738 Indigenous Australians (aged 40-92 years) living in 30 randomly selected sites, stratified by remoteness. METHODS: Choroidal nevi were graded from retinal photographs using standard protocols. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Prevalence of choroidal nevi. RESULTS: In the non-Indigenous population aged 50 years and over, the weighted prevalence of choroidal nevi was 2.1% (95% CI: 1.4, 3.3). Among Indigenous Australians aged 40 years and over, the weighted prevalence of choroidal nevi was 0.68% (95% CI: 0.4, 1.3). The average maximum diameter, surface area and distance from the disc of the choroidal nevi was 1730 μm, 2 766 800 μm2 and 3400 μm, respectively. After multivariate adjustments, Indigenous participants (OR = 0.28, P = 0.01) and those of older age (OR = 0.79 per 10 years, P = 0.02) were less likely to have choroidal nevi. Choroidal nevus was not the primary cause of vision loss in any participant. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Choroidal nevi were relatively infrequent among NEHS participants, however non-Indigenous Australians had a significantly higher prevalence than Indigenous Australians. Choroidal nevi did not affect visual acuity and the majority were small.
-
ItemFuture burden of vision loss in Australia: Projections from the National Eye Health Survey(WILEY, 2020-08)IMPORTANCE: Projections of Australia's future burden of vision loss will inform eye health service delivery. BACKGROUND: This study aimed to forecast bilateral vision loss in Australia from 2020 to 2050. DESIGN: Population-based survey. PARTICIPANTS: Indigenous and non-indigenous Australians (n = 4253) aged ≥50 years from the National Eye Health Survey (NEHS, 2015-2016). METHODS: Using the age-and-sex-stratified prevalence of vision loss (better eye visual acuity <6/12) from the NEHS, the prevalence of, and number of people aged ≥50 years with, vision loss were forecast to 2050 using Australian census projections. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Prevalence of, and number of Australians with, vision loss from 2020 to 2050. RESULTS: The prevalence of vision loss is predicted to increase from 6.7% to 7.5% by 2050. Owing to population dynamics, the estimated number of Australians ≥50 years old with vision loss will nearly double from 532 386 in 2016 to 1 015 021 in 2050. The greatest increase in vision loss is expected to occur in those aged ≥80 years (2.6-fold, 2016 = 144 240; 2050 = 376 296). The number of people with uncorrected refractive error is projected to increase 1.7-fold, from 331 914 in 2016 to 578 969 in 2050. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Due to population growth and ageing, the future burden of vision loss in Australia is likely to increase, but the magnitude of this change is uncertain due to a lack of available data on some relevant input variables. Nonetheless, efforts are required to ensure early detection and treatment of major eye conditions, particularly treatable conditions such as uncorrected refractive error and cataract.
-
ItemTreatment coverage rates for refractive error in the National Eye Health survey(PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE, 2017-04-13)OBJECTIVE: To present treatment coverage rates and risk factors associated with uncorrected refractive error in Australia. METHODS: Thirty population clusters were randomly selected from all geographic remoteness strata in Australia to provide samples of 1738 Indigenous Australians aged 40 years and older and 3098 non-Indigenous Australians aged 50 years and older. Presenting visual acuity was measured and those with vision loss (worse than 6/12) underwent pinhole testing and hand-held auto-refraction. Participants whose corrected visual acuity improved to be 6/12 or better were assigned as having uncorrected refractive error as the main cause of vision loss. The treatment coverage rates of refractive error were calculated (proportion of participants with refractive error that had distance correction and presenting visual acuity better than 6/12), and risk factor analysis for refractive correction was performed. RESULTS: The refractive error treatment coverage rate in Indigenous Australians of 82.2% (95% CI 78.6-85.3) was significantly lower than in non-Indigenous Australians (93.5%, 92.0-94.8) (Odds ratio [OR] 0.51, 0.35-0.75). In Indigenous participants, remoteness (OR 0.41, 0.19-0.89 and OR 0.55, 0.35-0.85 in Outer Regional and Very Remote areas, respectively), having never undergone an eye examination (OR 0.08, 0.02-0.43) and having consulted a health worker other than an optometrist or ophthalmologist (OR 0.30, 0.11-0.84) were risk factors for low coverage. On the other hand, speaking English was a protective factor (OR 2.72, 1.13-6.45) for treatment of refractive error. Compared to non-Indigenous Australians who had an eye examination within one year, participants who had not undergone an eye examination within the past five years (OR 0.08, 0.03-0.21) or had never been examined (OR 0.05, 0.10-0.23) had lower coverage. CONCLUSION: Interventions that increase integrated optometry services in regional and remote Indigenous communities may improve the treatment coverage rate of refractive error. Increasing refractive error treatment coverage rates in both Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians through at least five-yearly eye examinations and the provision of affordable spectacles will significantly reduce the national burden of vision loss in Australia.
-
ItemParticipant referral rate in the National Eye Health Survey (NEHS)(PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE, 2017-04-04)PURPOSE: To present the rates of referral of participants in the National Eye Health Survey (NEHS) for further eye care. MATERIALS & METHODS: A national sample of 3098 non-Indigenous Australians aged 50-98 and 1738 Indigenous Australians aged 40-92 years living in 30 randomly selected sites was recruited using a door-to-door approach. Participants completed a general questionnaire and a series of eye tests, including vision and anterior segment assessment, intra-ocular pressure measurement, visual field testing and fundus photography. A predefined protocol was used to guide the referral of participants for follow up eye care. An ophthalmologist was on-call to assist with the triaging of participants. RESULTS: Of the total sample, 32.1% (994/3098) of non-Indigenous participants and 43.6% (757/1738) of Indigenous participants were referred for further eye care (p<0.001). A significant difference in referral rates for Indigenous Australians was observed between regions of differing geographic remoteness [range = 32.2% (Inner Regional)-60.4% (Very Remote), p <0.001]. After adjusting for covariates, males (OR = 1.24, 95% CI: 1.06-1.46), older age (OR = 1.02 per year, 95% CI: 1.01, 1.02) and longer time since previous eye examination (OR = 1.15 per year, 95% CI: 1.12, 1.19) were associated with higher rates of eye care referral in the non-Indigenous population. In the Indigenous population, older age (OR = 1.02 per year, 95% CI: 1.01-1.03), self-reported diabetes (OR = 1.70, 95% CI: 1.37-2.12), greater geographical remoteness (OR = 1.19, 95% CI: 1.09-1.29) and longer time since previous eye examination (OR = 1.10 per year, 95% CI: 1.07, 1.13) were associated with a higher rate of referral after multivariate adjustments. A total of 25 participants (1.4%) were referred for urgent follow-up of potentially sight threatening conditions. CONCLUSIONS: Our data has identified several high risk groups that required ophthalmic referral including older Australians, non-Indigenous men, Indigenous Australians with self-reported diabetes and those residing in very remote populations who may benefit from improvements in the provision and/or uptake of eye health services. Future longitudinal research is warranted to evaluate the feasibility and efficacy of implementing a referral protocol within a population-based research setting.