PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare habitual visual acuity in a sample of young children using two versions of the single Lea symbols charts with different crowding features.
METHODS: Monocular habitual visual acuity was measured in a sample of 77 young children aged between 4 and 6 years using crowded Lea symbols charts with either flanking bars separated from the central symbol by 0.5 optotype width or flanking Lea optotypes separated from the central symbol by 1.0 optotype width.
RESULTS: Mean visual acuity was higher (i.e., lower logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution) with the Lea symbols crowded using flanking optotypes, equivalent to about 1.5 optotype difference. Visual acuity measured with the two charts was significantly correlated; however, the 95% limits of agreement were larger than expected from repeatability studies using Lea symbols.
CONCLUSIONS: Lea symbols with flanking optotypes resulted in higher visual acuity than the Lea symbols with flanking bars, probably as a result of differences in the crowding effect. The two charts showed insufficient agreement, and we do not recommend their use interchangeably. We recommend using the Lea symbols with flanking bars because of the closer flanker-target separation.
METHODS: Malaysia was divided into six regions, with each region consisting of 50 clusters. Multistage cluster sampling method was used and each cluster contained 50 residents aged 50 years and above. Eligible subjects were interviewed and pertinent demographic details, barriers to cataract surgery, medical and ocular history was noted. Subjects had visual acuity assessment with tumbling 'E' Snellen optotypes and ocular examination with direct ophthalmoscope. The primary cause of VI was documented. Results were calculated for individual zones and weighted average was used to obtain overall prevalence for the country. Inter-regional and overall prevalence for blindness, severe VI and moderate VI were determined. Causes of VI, cataract surgical coverage and barriers to cataract surgery were assessed.
RESULTS: A total of 15,000 subjects were examined with a response rate of 95.3%. The age and gender-adjusted prevalence of blindness, severe visual impairment and moderate visual impairment were 1.2% (95% Confidence Interval: 1.0-1.4%), 1.0% (95%CI: 0.8-1.2%) and 5.9% (5.3-6.5%) respectively. Untreated cataract (58.6%), diabetic retinopathy (10.4%) and glaucoma (6.6%) were the commonest causes of blindness. Overall, 86.3% of the causes of blindness were avoidable. Cataract surgical coverage (CSC) in persons for blindness, severe visual impairment and moderate visual impairment was 90%, 86% and 66% respectively.
CONCLUSION: Increased patient education and further expansion of ophthalmological services are required to reduce avoidable blindness even further in Malaysia.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the clinical characteristics, including 24-hour ocular perfusion pressure and risk of progression in patients with baseline central VF defect, as compared with those with peripheral VF defect in NTG.
DESIGN: This was a prospective, longitudinal study.
METHODS: A total of 65 NTG patients who completed 5 years of follow-up were included in this study. All the enrolled patients underwent baseline 24-hour intraocular pressure and blood pressure monitoring via 2-hourly measurements in their habitual position and had ≥5 reliable VF tests during the 5-year follow-up. Patients were assigned to two groups on the basis of VF defect locations at baseline, the central 10 degrees, and the peripheral 10- to 24-degree area. Modified Anderson criteria were used to assess global VF progression over 5 years. Kaplan-Meier analyses were used to compare the elapsed time of confirmed VF progression in the two groups. Hazard ratios for the association between clinical risk factors and VF progression were obtained by using Cox proportional hazards models.
RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the patients with baseline central and peripheral VF defects in terms of demography, clinical, ocular and systemic hemodynamic factors. Eyes with baseline defects involving the central fields progressed faster (difference: βcentral=-0.78 dB/y, 95% confidence interval=-0.22 to -1.33, P=0.007) and have 3.56 times higher hazard of progressing (95% confidence interval=1.17-10.82, P=0.025) than those with only peripheral defects.
CONCLUSION: NTG patients with baseline central VF involvement are at increased risk of progression compared with those with peripheral VF defect.
METHODS: Non-interventional multicenter historical cohort study of intravitreal ranibizumab use for nAMD in routine clinical practice between April 2010 and April 2013. Eligible patients were diagnosed with nAMD, received at least one intravitreal ranibizumab injection during the study period, and had been observed for a minimum of 1 year (up to 3 years). Reimbursement scenarios were defined as self-paid, partially-reimbursed, and fully-reimbursed.
RESULTS: More than three-fourths (n = 2521) of the analysis population was partially-reimbursed for ranibizumab, while 16.4% (n = 532) was fully-reimbursed, and 5.8% was self-paid (n = 188). The average annual ranibizumab injection frequency was 4.1 injections in the partially-reimbursed, 4.7 in the fully-reimbursed and 2.6 in the self-paid populations. The average clinical monitoring frequency was estimated to be 6.7 visits/year, with similar frequencies observed across reimbursement categories. On average, patients experienced VA reduction of -0.7 letters and a decrease in CRT of -44.4 μm. The greatest mean CRT change was observed in the self-paid group, with -92.6 μm.
CONCLUSIONS: UNCOVER included a large, heterogeneous ranibizumab-treated nAMD population in real-world settings. Patients in all reimbursement scenarios attained vision stability on average, indicating control of disease activity.