Suchergebnisse

Purpose: To investigate the structure–function relationship in eyes with drusen with mesopic and scotopic microperimetry. Methods: We analyzed structural and functional data from 43 eyes with drusen. Functional data were acquired with mesopic and scotopic two-color (red and cyan) microperimetry. Normative values were calculated using data from 56 healthy eyes. Structural measurements were green autofluorescence and dense macular optical coherence tomography scans. The latter were used to calculate the retinal pigment epithelium elevation (RPE-E) and the photoreceptor reflectivity ratio (PRR). The pointwise structure–function relationship was measured with linear mixed models having the log-transformed structural parameters as predictors and the sensitivity loss (SL, deviation from normal) as the response variable. Results: In the univariable analysis, the structural predictors were all significantly correlated (P < 0.05) with the SL in the mesopic and scotopic tests. In a multivariable model, mesopic microperimetry yielded the best structure–function relationship. All predictors were significant (P < 0.05), but the predictive power was weak (best R2 = 0.09). The relationship was improved when analyzing locations with abnormal RPE-E (best R2 = 0.18). Conclusions: Mesopic microperimetry shows better structure–function relationship compared to scotopic microperimetry; the relationship is weak, likely due to the early functional damage and the small number of tested locations affected by drusen. The relationship is stronger when locations with drusen are isolated for the mesopic and scotopic cyan test. Translational Relevance: These results could be useful to devise integrated structure–function methods to detect disease progression in intermediate age-related macular degeneration. ; DPC and GM received funding from the Innovative Medicines Initiative 2 Joint Undertaking under grant 116076 (Macustar). This joint undertaking receives support from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation program ...

AbstractIntroductionSystematic reviews are important to inform decision‐making for evidence‐based health care and patient choice. Deciding which reviews should be prioritized is a key issue for decision‐makers and researchers. Cochrane Eyes and Vision conducted a priority setting exercise for systematic reviews in eye health care.MethodsWe established a steering group including practitioners, patient organizations, and researchers. To identify potential systematic review questions, we searched global policy reports, research prioritization exercises, guidelines, systematic review databases, and the Cochrane Library (CENTRAL). We grouped questions into separate condition lists and conducted a two‐round online modified Delphi survey, including a ranking request. Participants in the survey were recruited through social media and the networks of the steering group.ResultsIn Round 1, 343 people ranked one or more of the condition lists. Participants were eye care practitioners (69%), researchers (37%), patients or carers (24%), research providers/funders (5%), or noneye health care practitioners (4%) and from all World Health Organization regions. Two hundred twenty‐six people expressed interest in completing Round 2 and 160 of these (71%) completed the Round 2 survey. Reviews on cataract and refractive error, reviews relevant to children, and reviews on rehabilitation were considered to have an important impact on the magnitude of disease and equity. Narrative comments emphasized the need for reviews on access to eye health care, particularly for underserved groups, including people with intellectual disabilities.ConclusionA global group of stakeholders prioritized questions on the effective and equitable delivery of services for eye health care. When considering the impact of systematic reviews in terms of reducing the burden of eye conditions, equity is clearly an important criterion to consider in priority‐setting exercises.

TOPIC: To estimate the prevalence of nonrefractive visual impairment and blindness in European persons 55 years of age and older. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Few visual impairment and blindness prevalence estimates are available for the European population. In addition, many of the data collected in European population-based studies currently are unpublished and have not been included in previous estimates. METHODS: Fourteen European population-based studies participating in the European Eye Epidemiology Consortium (n = 70 723) were included. Each study provided nonrefractive visual impairment and blindness prevalence estimates stratified by age (10-year strata) and gender. Nonrefractive visual impairment and blindness were defined as best-corrected visual acuity worse than 20/60 and 20/400 in the better eye, respectively. Using random effects meta-analysis, prevalence rates were estimated according to age, gender, geographical area, and period (1991-2006 and 2007-2012). Because no data were available for Central and Eastern Europe, population projections for numbers of affected people were estimated using Eurostat population estimates for European high-income countries in 2000 and 2010. RESULTS: The age-standardized prevalence of nonrefractive visual impairment in people 55 years of age or older decreased from 2.22% (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.34-3.10) from 1991 through 2006 to 0.92% (95% CI, 0.42-1.42) from 2007 through 2012. It strongly increased with age in both periods (up to 15.69% and 4.39% in participants 85 years of age or older from 1991 through 2006 and from 2007 through 2012, respectively). Age-standardized prevalence of visual impairment tended to be higher in women than men from 1991 through 2006 (2.67% vs. 1.88%), but not from 2007 through 2012 (0.87% vs. 0.88%). No differences were observed between northern, western, and southern regions of Europe. The projected numbers of affected older inhabitants in European high-income countries decreased from 2.5 million affected individuals in 2000 to 1.2 million in 2010. Of those, 584 000 were blind in 2000, in comparison with 170 000 who were blind in 2010. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the increase in the European older population, our study indicated that the number of visually impaired people has decreased in European high-income countries in the last 20 years. This may be the result of major improvements in eye care and prevention, the decreasing prevalence of eye diseases, or both.