Eye health is essential to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals; vision needs to be reframed as a development issue There is extensive evidence showing that improving eye health contributes directly and indirectly to achieving many Sustainable Development Goals, including reducing poverty and improving work productivity, general and mental health, and education and equity. Improving eye health is a practical and cost-effective way of unlocking human potential. Eye health needs to be reframed as an enabling, cross-cutting issue within the sustainable development framework. Almost everyone will experience impaired vision or an eye condition during their lifetime and require eye care services; urgent action is necessary to meet the rapidly growing eye health need In 2020, 1•1 billion people had distance vision impairment or uncorrected presbyopia. By 2050, this figure is expected to rise to 1•8 billion. Most affected people live in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) with avoidable causes of vision impairment. During the life course, most people will experience vision impairment, even if just the need for reading glasses. Because of unmet needs and an ageing global population, eye health is a major public health and sustainable development concern which warrants urgent political action. Eye health is an essential component of universal health coverage; it must be included in planning, resourcing, and delivery of health care Universal health coverage is not universal without affordable, high quality, equitable eye care. In line with the WHO World report on vision, we urge countries to consider eye care as an essential service within universal health coverage. To deliver comprehensive services including promotion, prevention, treatment, and rehabilitation, eye care needs to be included in national strategic health plans and development policies, health financing structures, and health workforce planning. Coordinated intersectoral action is needed to systematically improve population eye health, also within healthy ageing initiatives, schools, and the workplace. Integration of eye health services with multiple relevant components of health service delivery and at all levels of the health system is of central importance.

ObjectiveThis study was designed to propose a classification scheme for platforms of surgical delivery in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) and to review the literature documenting their effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, sustainability, and role in training. Approximately 28 % of the global burden of disease is surgical. In LMICs, much of this burden is borne by a rapidly growing international charitable sector, in fragmented platforms ranging from short-term trips to specialized hospitals. Systematic reviews of these platforms, across regions and across disease conditions, have not been performed.MethodsA systematic review of MEDLINE and EMBASE databases was performed from 1960 to 2013. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were defined a priori. Bibliographies of retrieved studies were searched by hand. Of the 8,854 publications retrieved, 104 were included.ResultsSurgery by international charitable organizations is delivered under two, specialized hospitals and temporary platforms. Among the latter, short-term surgical missions were the most common and appeared beneficial when no other option was available. Compared to other platforms, however, worse results and a lack of cost-effectiveness curtailed their role. Self-contained temporary platforms that did not rely on local infrastructure showed promise, based on very few studies. Specialized hospitals provided effective treatment and appeared sustainable; cost-effectiveness evidence was limited.ConclusionsBecause the charitable sector delivers surgery in vastly divergent ways, systematic review of these platforms has been difficult. This paper provides a framework from which to study these platforms for surgery in LMICs. Given the available evidence, self-contained temporary platforms and specialized surgical centers appear to provide more effective and cost-effective care than short-term surgical mission trips, except when no other delivery platform exists.

Purpose To measure the waste generation and lifecycle environmental emissions from cataract surgery via phacoemulsification in a recognized resource-efficient setting. Setting Two tertiary care centers of the Aravind Eye Care System in southern India. Design Observational case series. Methods Manual waste audits, purchasing data, and interviews with Aravind staff were used in a hybrid environmental lifecycle assessment framework to quantify the environmental emissions associated with cataract surgery. Kilograms of solid waste generated and midpoint emissions in a variety of impact categories (eg, kilograms of carbon dioxide equivalents). Results Aravind generates 250 grams of waste per phacoemulsification and nearly 6 kilograms of carbon dioxide-equivalents in greenhouse gases. This is approximately 5% of the United Kingdom’s phaco carbon footprint with comparable outcomes. A majority of Aravind’s lifecycle environmental emissions occur in the sterilization process of reusable instruments because their surgical system uses largely reusable instruments and materials. Electricity use in the operating room and the Central Sterile Services Department (CSSD) accounts for 10% to 25% of most environmental emissions. Conclusions Results show that surgical systems in most developed countries and, in particular their use of materials, are unsustainable. Ophthalmologists and other medical specialists can reduce material use and emissions in medical procedures using the system described here.

PurposeTo describe the prevalence of cataract in older people in 2 areas of north and south India.DesignPopulation-based, cross-sectional study.ParticipantsRandomly sampled villages were enumerated to identify people aged ≥60 years. Of 7518 enumerated people, 78% participated in a hospital-based ophthalmic examination.MethodsThe examination included visual acuity measurement, dilatation, and anterior and posterior segment examination. Digital images of the lens were taken and graded by type and severity of opacity using the Lens Opacity Classification System III (LOCS III).Main Outcome MeasuresAge- and gender-standardized prevalence of cataract and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We defined type of cataract based on the LOCS III grade in the worse eye of: ≥4 for nuclear cataract, ≥3 for cortical cataract, and ≥2 for posterior subcapsular cataract (PSC). Any unoperated cataract was based on these criteria or ungradable dense opacities. Any cataract was defined as any unoperated or operated cataract.ResultsThe prevalence of unoperated cataract in people aged ≥60 was 58% in north India (95% CI, 56–60) and 53% (95% CI, 51–55) in south India (P = 0.01). Nuclear cataract was the most common type: 48% (95% CI, 46–50) in north India and 38% (95% CI, 37–40) in south India (P<0.0001); corresponding figures for PSC were 21% (95% CI, 20–23) and 17% (95% CI, 16–19; P = 0.003), respectively, and for cortical cataract 7.6% (95% CI, 7–9) and 10.2% (95% CI, 9–11; P<0.004). Bilateral aphakia/pseudophakia was slightly higher in the south (15.5%) than in the north (13.2%; P<0.03). The prevalence of any cataracts was similar in north (73.8%) and south India (71.8%). The prevalence of unoperated cataract increased with age and was higher in women than men (odds ratio [OR], 1.8). Aphakia/pseudophakia was also more common in women, either unilateral (OR, 1.2; P<0.02) or bilateral (OR, 1.3; P<0.002).ConclusionsWe found high rates of unoperated cataract in older people in north and south India. Posterior subcapsular cataract was more common than in western studies. Women had higher rates of cataract, which was not explained by differential access to surgery.Financial Disclosure(s)The authors have no proprietary or commercial interest in any of the materials discussed in this article.

Background Cataract accounts for 50% of blindness globally and remains the leading cause of visual impairment in all regions of the world, despite improvements in surgical outcomes (WHO 2005). This number is expected to rise due to an aging population and increase in life expectancy. Although cataracts are not preventable, their surgical treatment is one of the most cost-e ective interventions in healthcare. Objectives To compare the e ects of di erent surgical interventions for age-related cataract. Search methods We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE up to July 2006, NRR Issue 3 2005, the reference lists of identified trials and we contacted investigators and experts in the field for details of published and unpublished trials. Selection criteria We included randomised controlled trials (RCTS). Data collection and analysis Two review authors independently extracted data and discrepancies were resolved by discussion. Where appropriate, risk ratios, odds ratios and weighted mean di erences were summarised a er assessing heterogeneity between the studies. Main results We identified 17 trials that randomised a total of 9627 people. Phacoemulsification gave a better visual outcome than extracapsular surgery but similar average cost per procedure in Europe but not in poorer countries. Extracapsular surgery with posterior chamber lens implant and ICCE with or without an anterior chamber intraocular lens (IOL) implant gave acceptable visual outcomes but extracapsular surgery had less complications. Manual small incision surgery provides better visual outcome than ECCE but slightly inferior unaided visual acuity compared to phacoemulsification.