Objective: To assess the prevalence and causes of vision loss in Australia and to project these data into the future.
Design: Synthesis of data from two cross‐sectional population‐based cohort studies — the Melbourne Visual Impairment Project and the Blue Mountains Eye Study — and extrapolation to the entire Australian population.
Setting and participants: 8376 community and 533 nursing home residents recruited between 1992 and 1996 in urban and rural Victoria and New South Wales.
Main outcome measures: Age‐standardised prevalence of low vision (visual acuity < 6/12) and blindness (visual acuity < 6/60) (both measured in the best eye, with spectacles if usually worn for distance vision), and their causes for the Australian population for 2000 to 2024, projected from Australian Bureau of Statistics population data.
Results: In 2004, 480 300 Australians were estimated to have low vision, including 50 600 with blindness. The most common causes of low vision were undercorrected refractive error (62%), cataract (14%) and age‐related macular degeneration (10%). The latter was responsible for almost half of all cases of blindness. The numbers of people with low vision and blindness are projected to almost double by 2024.
Conclusions: Vision loss in Australia is a much bigger problem than is usually recognised; 76% of low vision is caused by uncorrected refractive error or cataract, both readily treatable. However, the prevention and treatment of macular degeneration poses a major challenge.
Aim: To investigate whether unilateral vision loss reduced any aspects of quality of life in comparison with normal vision and to compare its impact with that of bilateral vision loss. Methods: This study used cluster stratified random sample of 3271 urban participants recruited between 1992 and 1994 for the Melbourne Visual Impairment Project. All predictors and outcomes were from the 5 year follow up examinations conducted in 1997-9. Results: There were 2530 participants who attended the follow up survey and had measurement of presenting visual acuity. Both unilateral and bilateral vision loss were significantly associated with increased odds of having problems in visual functions including reading the telephone book, newspaper, watching television, and seeing faces. Non-correctable by refraction unilateral vision loss increased the odds of falling when away from home (OR = 2.86, 95% CI 1.16 to 7.08), getting help with chores (OR = 3.09, 95% CI 1.40 to 6.83), and becoming dependent (getting help with meals and chores) (OR = 7.50, 95% CI 1.97 to 28.6). Non-correctable bilateral visual loss was associated with many activities of daily living except falling. Conclusions: Non-correctable unilateral vision loss was associated with issues of safety and independent living while non-correctable bilateral vision loss was associated with nursing home placement, emotional wellbeing, use of community services, and activities of daily living. Correctable or treatable vision loss should be detected and attended to.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.