1442-9071/asset/cover.gif?v=1&s=7c6769e05691a4581ae173da02433f6f6fe197f7 "Clinical & Experimental Ophthalmology")
Financial disclosure: The authors have no proprietary or financial interest in this study. Partial equipment grants for the study were received from: • Ophthalmic Research Institute of Australia: B & L Lowe Grant • NH & MRC: Centre for Clinical Research Excellence
1442-9071/asset/olbannerleft.gif?v=1&s=864b2676ecbb7b79a3b4729351f79b750283a00b)
1442-9071/asset/olbannerright.gif?v=1&s=2ba103739f1538f232a2b55c70e97e41430e4116)
Prevalence and associations of refractive error in indigenous Australians within central Australia: the Central Australian Ocular Health Study
Article first published online: 26 FEB 2010
DOI: 10.1111/j.1442-9071.2010.02258.x
© 2010 The Authors. Journal compilation © 2010 Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Ophthalmologists
Additional Information
How to Cite
Landers, J., Henderson, T. and Craig, J. (2010), Prevalence and associations of refractive error in indigenous Australians within central Australia: the Central Australian Ocular Health Study. Clinical & Experimental Ophthalmology, 38: 381–386. doi: 10.1111/j.1442-9071.2010.02258.x
Publication History
- Issue published online: 11 JUN 2010
- Article first published online: 26 FEB 2010
- Received 13 August 2009; accepted 12 January 2010.
- Abstract
- Article
- References
- Cited By
Keywords:
- associations;
- indigenous Australians;
- prevalence;
- refractive error
Abstract
Purpose: To determine the prevalence and associations of refractive error within the indigenous Australian population living in central Australia.
Methods: 1884 individuals aged 20 years or older, living in one of 30 remote communities within the statistical local area of ‘central Australia’ were recruited for this study. This equated to 36% of those aged 20 years or older and 67% of those aged 40 years or older within this district. Participants were recruited as they presented to the eye clinic at each remote community. Participants underwent subjective refraction to determine spherical equivalent and then had a slit-lamp anterior segment examination. Participants were only included if they were phakic and only the right eye was considered. The prevalence of hypermetropia worse than +1.0 dioptres (D), myopia worse than −0.5 D and astigmatism worse than 1.0 D is presented.
Results: From those recruited, 15.2% were hypermetropic; 11.1% were myopic; and 6.2% had astigmatism. Participants became progressively more hypermetropic with increasing age until the age of 70 years, after which time they become more myopic. Furthermore, there was an increasing likelihood of myopia and a decreasing likelihood of hypermetropia with increasing nuclear opalescent cataract.
Conclusion: Our study has shown that indigenous Australians are less likely to be ametropic compared with non-indigenous groups. Variations with age and nuclear opalescent cataract seen in other previous work have also been observed in our sample.