China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
The role, impact and importance of key caregivers and decision makers
Published in Neera Bhatia, Critically Impaired Infants and End of Life Decision Making, 2015
For example, physical impairment may be less important to an individual than mental impairment. Millions of individuals wear corrective lenses in glasses due to a visual impairment, but would be unlikely to question their ‘quality of life’ or consider themselves limited in choices or lifestyle. In contrast, a lower intelligence quotient (IQ) or learning disability is more likely to affect an individual’s life choices, career and socioeconomic outcomes. Saigal and Tyson’s studies indicate that parents and doctors may report a higher level of disability and lower quality of life than the affected person. Further, ‘Parents views on QoL [quality of life] may be negatively influenced by the burden of caregiving, stress, and their own mental, social, and economic status.’73
Healthy Aging through Knowledge and Self-Care
Published in Sharon Simson, Laura B. Wilson, Jared Hermalin, Robert Hess, Aging and Prevention, 2014
Some changes associated with aging have the potential for a major impact on health status. Sensory changes are in this category. Presbyopia results from changes in the lens and ciliary muscle. By age 50 corrective lens are needed almost universally for close work and reading (Botwinick, 1978). Visual acuity also declines as does the extent of the visual field. Dark adaptation and color vision also diminish. Cataract formation and glaucoma increase in incidence with age.
The Impact of Sight Loss in Social Work Practice
Published in Francis K. O. Yuen, Carol B. Cohen, Kristine Tower, Disability and Social Work Education, 2013
If one experiences a total loss of vision, the result is blindness. While medical advances are profound today, total blindness is almost always a life-long circumstance. In the United States, the term “legal blindness” is commonly used and is characterized by visual acuity of 20/200 or less in the better eye (Wahl, Schilling, Osald, & Heyl, 1999). Corrective lenses or glasses can help some individuals, who are legally blind, while others cannot be helped. If one experiences a partial loss of vision, the result is called low vision, partial visual loss, visual-impairment or sight-impairment. Other persons will have constructed their own terminology for describing their vision or change in vision such as “bad eyes, poor vision, or visually challenged.”
Stakeholders’ Perceptions of a School-Based Eye Care Programme in Baltimore, MD
Published in Ophthalmic Epidemiology, 2022
Alyssa M. Kretz, Hursuong Vongsachang, David S. Friedman, Jonathan Callan, Madison Wahl, M. Rani Mukherjee, Amanda Neitzel, Megan E. Collins
The majority of participants also mentioned positive impacts of eyeglasses. Most commonly, they mentioned perceived academic and visual improvements that are consistent with findings in prior studies.21,25,26 These include improved behavior, focus, and school performance.21 The impact on behavior also suggests an impact of eyeglasses wear that reaches beyond the child and impacts those around them. For example, a child who shows fewer behavioural problems after receiving eyeglasses, as demonstrated both qualitatively in our study and quantitatively in a UK-based study, may be less disruptive in class.27 Interestingly, while we received a few comments about improved confidence, the majority focused on academic and health impacts rather than general wellbeing or impacts outside the classroom. Other studies have found that poor vision causes psychological stress which may be alleviated with corrective lenses.21 We also found that teachers tended to discuss their observations of impact slightly more than did parents, perhaps because they are uniquely positioned to see the immediate impacts in the classroom. While it remains to be seen how such impacts will manifest in the long term and how they can be supported by studies examining academic outcomes, our study shows positive perceptions and impacts regarding school-based eye care.
Corneal cross-linking versus conventional management for keratoconus: a lifetime economic model
Published in Journal of Medical Economics, 2021
Richard L. Lindstrom, John P. Berdahl, Eric D. Donnenfeld, Vance Thompson, David Kratochvil, Chiang Wong, Heather Falvey, Grace Lytle, Marc F. Botteman, John A. Carter
Costs and utilities were based on values reported in the literature and are listed in Tables 2 and 3. The direct medical costs of PK were estimated using a 2013 report by the Eye Bank Association of America37. The report details an analysis conducted to assess the total and component costs of three types of keratoplasty (lamellar, penetrating, and endothelial) conducted in the US healthcare setting using claims data and reimbursed amounts. The costs of corrective lenses were stratified by two categories: “less severe” applied to AK stages 1 and 2 and “more severe” applied to AK stages 3 and 4. Adverse event costs were applied for the CXL procedure and PK procedure separately. While both procedures are associated with a variety low-probability adverse events, the clinical ophthalmologist authors of this report (RLL, JPB, EDD, VT) identified which among these should be included in the model due to their clinical significance. All adverse events were applied on a one-off, per event basis and include the costs attributable to clinically attending each for up to 1 year (i.e. the maximum considered time horizon for a given adverse event).
The Association between Frailty and Uncorrected Refractive Error in Older Adults
Published in Ophthalmic Epidemiology, 2020
Moon Jeong Lee, Varshini Varadaraj, Jing Tian, Karen Bandeen-Roche, Bonnielin K. Swenor
Uncorrected refractive error is defined as an inability to focus images on the retina, due to the shape of the eye, that can be corrected with spectacles, contact lenses, or refractive surgery.1 It can be simply defined as the need for corrective lenses or the need for better correction. Uncorrected refractive error is the most common cause of impaired vision in older adults with profound implications on quality of life and independence.2 Prior studies have demonstrated that poor visual acuity is associated with increased difficulty with daily activities.3,4 A few studies have also shown that impaired vision due to uncorrected refractive error is also associated with worse health outcomes such as increased rates of falls and fractures, and all-cause mortality.5,6 Interventions to correct uncorrected refractive error have been shown to decrease rates of falls, improve health outcomes, and increase quality of life.7–9 Given that older individuals are disproportionately affected by visual impairment, with an estimated 94.8 million visually impaired individuals from uncorrected refractive error in those aged ≥50 compared to 18.4 million in those ages 40–49,10,11 it is important to examine the impact of uncorrected refractive error on the overall health of older individuals.