An Analytical Cross‑Sectional Comparative Assessment of Refractive Error and Related Ocular Morbidities between School Children
- 1. Senior Resident, Department of Ophthalmology, ANMMCH, Gaya, Bihar, India
- 2. Assistant Professor, Department of Ophthalmology, Lord Buddha Koshi Medical College and Hospital, Saharsa, Bihar, India
Description
Aim: The aim of the present study was to compare the refractive error and related ocular morbidities between school children in Bihar region. Methods: An analytical cross‑sectional study design was adopted to screen school children from randomly selected schools in urban and rural areas of Bihar and duration of the study was 1 year. All children aged 5–15 years that were present in the school on the day of examination were included in the study. Seven urban and eight rural schools were then randomly selected. A total of 1680 students were allocated for the evaluation. Either due to the non‑availability of the consent form or the child itself, 1500 (89.9%) were included for the final evaluation.
Results: Out of 1500 students, 800 belong to urban school and 700 belong to rural areas. The gender distribution between groups was similar (P = 0.6). The proportion of preparatory and secondary students of rural and urban was significantly different (P < 0.05). The coverage of RE services among urban students was significantly greater than rural students. 70% urban students were and 35% rural students in preparatory. The prevalence of RE was significantly higher in urban as compared to rural students. The prevalence of hyperopia was significantly higher among rural students compared to urban school students (P = 0.001). The prevalence of myopia was significantly higher among urban students compared to rural students (P < 0.001). The prevalence of anisometropia was significantly higher in urban students compared to rural students (P = 0.001). The prevalence of strabismus was significantly higher in urban students compared to rural students (P < 0.001). The proportion of rural students with “functional normal vision” was significantly higher than urban students (93.42% vs. 65%). Conclusion: This study revealed that the most common cause of ocular morbidity was refractive error. The majority of the causes were either treatable or preventable. A simple school screening was an effective and an easy method for early detection of ocular problems.
Abstract (English)
Aim: The aim of the present study was to compare the refractive error and related ocular morbidities between school children in Bihar region. Methods: An analytical cross‑sectional study design was adopted to screen school children from randomly selected schools in urban and rural areas of Bihar and duration of the study was 1 year. All children aged 5–15 years that were present in the school on the day of examination were included in the study. Seven urban and eight rural schools were then randomly selected. A total of 1680 students were allocated for the evaluation. Either due to the non‑availability of the consent form or the child itself, 1500 (89.9%) were included for the final evaluation.
Results: Out of 1500 students, 800 belong to urban school and 700 belong to rural areas. The gender distribution between groups was similar (P = 0.6). The proportion of preparatory and secondary students of rural and urban was significantly different (P < 0.05). The coverage of RE services among urban students was significantly greater than rural students. 70% urban students were and 35% rural students in preparatory. The prevalence of RE was significantly higher in urban as compared to rural students. The prevalence of hyperopia was significantly higher among rural students compared to urban school students (P = 0.001). The prevalence of myopia was significantly higher among urban students compared to rural students (P < 0.001). The prevalence of anisometropia was significantly higher in urban students compared to rural students (P = 0.001). The prevalence of strabismus was significantly higher in urban students compared to rural students (P < 0.001). The proportion of rural students with “functional normal vision” was significantly higher than urban students (93.42% vs. 65%). Conclusion: This study revealed that the most common cause of ocular morbidity was refractive error. The majority of the causes were either treatable or preventable. A simple school screening was an effective and an easy method for early detection of ocular problems.
Files
IJPCR,Vol15,Issue3,Article112.pdf
Files
(332.8 kB)
| Name | Size | Download all |
|---|---|---|
|
md5:373c923eb01e87655833fc52d7595cd4
|
332.8 kB | Preview Download |
Additional details
Dates
- Accepted
-
2023-01-28
Software
- Repository URL
- https://impactfactor.org/PDF/IJPCR/15/IJPCR,Vol15,Issue3,Article112.pdf
- Development Status
- Active
References
- 1. Vision for Children – A Global Overview of Blindness, Childhood and Vision 2020 Right To Sight [WSDO7 Report]. 2. World Health Organization. Preventing Blindness in Children. Report of a WHO/IAPB Scientific Meeting, Hyderabad, India, 1999. WHO/PBL/ 00.002077. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2000. 3. Jose R, Sachdeva S. School eye screening and the National Program for Control of Blindness. Indian pediatrics. 2009 Mar 17;46. 4. Gilbert C, Rahi J, Quinn G. Visual impairment and blindness in children. In: Johnson G, Minassian D, Weale W, West S, editors. Epidemiology of Eye Disease. 2nd ed. UK: Arnold Publishers; 2003. 5. Jose R. Present status of the national programme for control of blindness in India. Community Eye Health J 2008; 21:103-4. 6. Kishore J. National Health Programmes of India. 9th ed. New Delhi: Century Publications; 2011. p. 420‑1.7. Rono HK, Bastawrous A, Macleod D, Wanjala E, Di Tanna GL, Weiss HA, Burton MJ. Smartphone-based screening for visual impairment in Kenyan school children: a cluster randomised controlled trial. The Lancet Global Health. 2018 Aug 1;6 (8):e924-32. 8. Aldebasi YH. Prevalence of correctable visual impairment in primary school children in Qassim Province, Saudi Arabia. Journal of Optometry. 2014 Jul 1;7(3):168-76. 9. Rose KA, Morgan IG, Ip J, Kifley A, Huynh S, Smith W, Mitchell P. Outdoor activity reduces the prevalence of myopia in children. Ophthalmology. 2008 Aug 1;115(8): 12002079-85. 10. Schneider J, Leeder SR, Gopinath B, Wang JJ, Mitchell P. Frequency, course, and impact of correctable visual impairment (uncorrected refractive error). Survey of ophthalmology. 2010 Nov 1;55(6):539 -60. 11. World Health Organization. Global Initiative for the Elimination of Avoidable Blindness: Action Plan 2006‑2011. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2007. 12. Wojciechowski R. Nature and nurture: the complex genetics of myopia and refractive error. Clinical genetics. 2011 Apr;79(4):301-20. 13. Fan Q, Verhoeven VJ, Wojciechowski R, Barathi VA, Hysi PG, Guggenheim JA, Höhn R, Vitart V, Khawaja AP, Yamashiro K, Hosseini SM. Metaanalysis of gene–environment-wide association scans accounting for education level identifies additional loci for refractive error. Nature communications. 2016 Apr 6;7(1):110 08. 14. Saxena R, Vashist P, Tandon R, Pandey RM, Bhardawaj A, Menon V, Mani K. Prevalence of myopia and its risk factors in urban school children in Delhi: the North India Myopia Study (NIM Study). PloS one. 2015 Feb 26;10(2):e0117349. 15. John DD, Paul P, Kujur ES, David S, Jasper S, Muliyil J. Prevalence of refractive errors and number needed to screen among rural high school children in Southern India: A crosssectional study. Journal of clinical and diagnostic research: JCDR. 2017 Aug;11(8):NC16. 16. Resnikoff S, Pascolini D, Mariotti SP, Pokharel GP. Global magnitude of visual impairment caused by uncorrected refractive errors in 2004. Bulletin of the World Health Organization. 2008 Jan;86(1):63-70. 17. World Health Organisation. Blindness and deafness unit and international agency for the prevention of blindness. (2000). Preventing blindness in children: Report of a WHO/IAPB scientific meeting. Hyderabad, India, 13‑17 April 1999. 18. World Health Organisation. Blindness and deafness unit and WHO program for the prevention of blindness. Elimination of avoidable visual disability due to refractive errors: Report of an informal planning meeting Geneva, 3‑5 July 2000. 19. Warkad VU, Panda L, Behera P, Das T, Mohanta BC, Khanna R. The Tribal Odisha Eye Disease Study (TOES) 1: prevalence and causes of visual impairment among tribal children in an urban school in Eastern India. Journal of American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus. 2018 Apr 1;22(2):145-e1. 20. Alsaqr A, Abu Sharha A, Fagehi R, Almutairi A, Alosaimi S, Almalki A, Alluwaymi A. The visual status of adolescents in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia: a population study. Clinical Ophthalmology. 2018 May 22:965-72. 21. Mittal S, Maitreya A, Dhasmana R. Clinical profile of refractive errors in children in a tertiary care hospital of Northern India. Int J Community MedPublic Health. 2016 May;3(5):1189- 94. 22. Autrata R, Krejčířová I, Griščíková L, Doležel Z. Refractive surgery in children with myopic anisometropia and amblyopia in comparison with conventional treatment by contact lenses. Ceska a slovenska oftalmologie: casopis Ceske oftalmologicke spolecnosti a Slovenske of talmologicke spolecnosti. 2016;72(2):12-9. 23. Mendez MA, Arguello L, Martinez J, Vargas MS, Rodriguez AM, Papa CE, Peterseim CM, Víquez MO, Trivedi RH, Peterseim MM. Evaluation of the Spot Vision Screener in young children in Costa Rica. Journal of American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus. 2015 Oct 1;19(5):441-4. 24. Peterseim MM, Davidson JD, Trivedi R, Wilson ME, Papa CE, Cheeseman EW. Detection of strabismus by the spot vision screener. Journal of American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus. 2015 Dec 1;19(6):512-4. 25. Acendra A. H. Y., Sampayo F. H., Robles A. C. W., Ariza M. A. V., León J. S. T., & Badillo L. Y. E. Association between Guillain-Barré Syndrome and Application of the Janssen Vaccine. Journal of Medical Research and Health Sciences, 2022;5(4): 1950– 1954.