Purpose To investigate the associations between visual impairment (VI) and diabetic retinopathy (DR) with the prevalence of falls, recurrent falls, and falls reporting injuries (FRIs). Design Cross-sectional analyses of associations between VI, DR, or both VI and DR with the prevalence of any fall, recurrent falls, and FRIs using data from 65,046 adults (45+ years) who completed the 2018 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) Diabetes Module. Subjects, Participants, and/or Controls Participants were categorized into four groups: no VI or DR (reference), DR only, VI only, and both VI and DR. Methods Separate multivariable logistic regression models, adjusted for sociodemographics and comorbidities, were used to analyze the association between VI, DR, or VI and DR with the odds of experiencing any fall, recurrent falls, or FRIs. Main Outcome Measures The association between VI, DR, or VI and DR with the odds of experiencing any fall, recurrent falls, or FRIs. Results Compared to adults with no VI or DR, those with VI reported 1.72 greater odds of experiencing any fall (adjusted odds ratio (aOR)=1.716, p<0.001), 1.82 greater odds of an increasing number of falls (aOR=1.824, p<0.001), and 2.08 greater odds of FRIs (aOR=2.076, p<0.001). Similarly, those with DR only also had substantially greater odds of experiencing any fall (aOR=1.741, p<0.001), an increasing number of falls (aOR = 1.735, p<0.001), and FRIs (aOR=1.658, p=0.004). The interaction effect between VI and DR was not significant. Subjects with both VI and DR experienced 3.80 greater odds of any fall, 2.73 greater odds of increasing falls, and 2.79 greater odds of FRIs, which was greater than those with VI or DR alone or neither condition. Further, subjects aged 45–64 years had significantly higher odds of FRIs than those aged 65+. Conclusions Using data from 17 states and territories implementing the 2018 BRFSS Diabetes Module, we found that adults with both VI and DR experienced a greater likelihood of falls, recurrent falls, and FRIs than those with neither or either condition. However, the inability to infer temporal or causal relationships from this cross-sectional, self-reported analysis should be considered. These findings underscore the importance for practitioners to communicate fall risks among people with DR and VI and support policies promoting tailored interventions for people experiencing these specific conditions.

Background: Increased access and utilization of vision care services has the potential to reduce preventable vision loss. The state of Ohio has been uniquely proactive when collecting vision-oriented data through population health surveys, including the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS). These data can be used to better understand vision care utilization patterns and access to insurance. Methods: Responses to 3 items administered in the Ohio BRFSS that assess vision care utilization and insurance coverage were compared between 2 different administration periods, 2005-2011 and 2018-2019, using chi-square tests. Comparable data from 2 items assessing eye care utilization were available in 2005-2011 and 2019. Comparable data for insurance coverage were available in 2005-2011 and in 2018-2019. Responses were further stratified by population characteristics, including age, gender, household income, and education level. Results: The percentages of those reporting eye exams in the previous year were not significantly different between 2005-2011 and 2019 (chi-square, p = 0.06). In Ohio, the primary reason for not seeing a vision care provider in the past 12 months was “No reason to go” in 2005-2011 and in 2019. The second most common reason for not seeing a vision care provider in the past 12 months was “Cost/insurance,” which decreased between 2005-2011 and 2019 (chi-square, p <0.001). Insurance coverage for eye care increased between 2005-2011 and 2018-2019 (chi-square, p <0.001). Important differences were found within the demographic stratification. Conclusion: Population health surveillance data provide useful insight into vision care utilization and insurance coverage. Despite the increase in insurance coverage, eye care provider utilization remains relatively stable.

OBJECTIVES:To examine data from Delaware nursing homes to determine prevalence of age-related eye diseases (AREDs), vision impairment, and blindness and to compare the findings with the results of 11 US investigations of vision and eye health in nursing homes.DESIGN:This is a cross-sectional, retrospective study of nursing home patients.SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS:Twenty nursing homes in Delaware participated in the study, yielding comprehensive eye examination records for 2019 study participants.METHODS:Summary statistics and regression analyses.RESULTS:The overall prevalence of vision impairment or blindness was 63.8% and was above 60% for each age, sex, and race category. Prevalence of vision impairment or blindness was 68.4% among patients with cataracts, 69.4% among patients with macular degeneration, 70.5% among patients with glaucoma, and 68.4% among patients with diabetic retinopathy. Prevalence of blindness was 14.1%. Among patients with AREDs, prevalence of blindness ranged from 15.0% for patients with cataracts to 22.6% for patients with diabetic retinopathy. When compared with other investigations, we found wide variation in vision and eye factors reported and wide variation in the prevalence of those factors. Only 4 studies diagnosed both AREDs and visual function. Seven studies reported AREDs, and 7 reported vision impairment and/or blindness. Vision impairment or blindness ranged from 29% to 67%; cataract ranged from 32% to 83%; macular degeneration ranged from 4.6% to 70.7%. Glaucoma ranged from 5.3% to 41.4%; diabetic retinopathy ranged from 1.7% to 3.1%.CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS:Comprehensive eye examinations showed that vision impairment and blindness affected 63.8% of nursing home residents. Compared with other studies, there was a wide range of vision factors reported and wide variation in the prevalence of vision impairment or blindness and AREDs. This investigation suggests the importance of eye care in nursing homes and the importance of reporting standard vision and eye health factors to inform policy and practice.

SIGNIFICANCE Physically unhealthy days assessments in national health surveillance datasets represent a useful metric for quantifying quality-of-life differences in those with and without vision impairment. Disproportionately poorer physical health in the visually impaired population provides further rationale for the inclusion of vision care in multidisciplinary approaches to chronic disease management. PURPOSE This study aimed to assess the association between vision impairment and health-related quality of life using data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System. METHODS Data from each of the 50 states were extracted from the 2017 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System data set. Self-report of difficulty seeing was used to categorize visually impaired versus nonvisually impaired populations. Self-report number of physically unhealthy days in the previous 30 days was used to quantify quality of life. The number of unhealthy days was calculated for the visually impaired and nonvisually impaired cohorts for each state. The ratio of the number of physically unhealthy days in the visually impaired versus nonvisually impaired population was calculated for each state and for different age cohorts. RESULTS Mean numbers of physically unhealthy days among persons with and without severe vision impairment across all states were 10.63 and 3.68 days, respectively, and demonstrated considerable geographic variability. Mean ratios of physically unhealthy healthy days in the visually impaired versus the nonvisually impaired population were 2.91 in the 18- to 39-year-old cohort, 2.87 in the 40- to 64-year-old cohort, and 2.16 in the ≥65-year-old cohort. CONCLUSIONS National surveillance data demonstrate a greater number of physically unhealthy days in the visually impaired population, indicating a need to improve our understanding of causes that lead to reduced physical health among those with vision impairment. Additional research is needed to better understand how individuals perceive vision as part of their overall health.

PURPOSE: To examine self-reported oral health among adults aged 40 years and older with and without vision impairment. DESIGN: Cross-sectional, with a nationally representative sample. METHODS: We used publicly available data from the Oral Health Module, last administered in 2008, of the National Health Interview Survey. Outcome variables included fair/poor oral health status, mouth condition compared to others the same age, mouth problems (mouth sores, difficulty eating, dry mouth, bad breath, and/or jaw pain), teeth problems (toothache; broken/missing fillings or teeth; loose, crooked, or stained teeth; and/or bleeding gums), and lack of social participation. Using descriptive statistics and multivariate logistic regression, we examined the association (P < .05) between vision impairment and oral health outcomes by age group, sociodemographics, and other explanatory variables. RESULTS: Our study sample included 12,090 adults; 12.8% of adults aged 40-64 years reported vision impairment, and among them, 44.5% reported fair/poor oral health status and 47.2% reported any mouth problems. Among adults aged >= 65 years, 17.3% reported vision impairment, of whom 36.3% reported fair/poor oral health status and 57.3% reported any mouth problems. There is a strong association between vision impairment and poorer oral health of adults; adults aged 40-64 years with vision impairment reported 90%-150% greater odds of oral health problems, including fair/poor oral health status, mouth problems, and teeth problems, compared to people without vision impairment. CONCLUSIONS: Oral health disparities exist between adults with and without vision impairment. Targeted interventions are required to improve oral health in this vulnerable population. ((C) 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background Glaucoma is the foremost cause of irreversible blindness, and more than 50% of cases remain undiagnosed. Our objective was to report the costs of a glaucoma detection programme operationalised through Philadelphia community centres. Methods The analysis was performed using a healthcare system perspective in 2013 US dollars. Costs of examination and educational workshops were captured. Measures were total programme costs, cost/case of glaucoma detected and cost/case of any ocular disease detected (including glaucoma). Diagnoses are reported at the individual level (therefore representing a diagnosis made in one or both eyes). Staff time was captured during site visits to 15 of 43 sites and included time to deliver examinations and workshops, supervision, training and travel. Staff time was converted to costs by applying wage and fringe benefit costs from the US Bureau of Labor Statistics. Non-staff costs (equipment and mileage) were collected using study logs. Participants with previously diagnosed glaucoma were excluded. Results 1649 participants were examined. Mean total per-participant examination time was 56 min (SD 4). Mean total examination cost/participant was $139. The cost/case of glaucoma newly identified (open-angle glaucoma, angle-closure glaucoma, glaucoma suspect, or primary angle closure) was $420 and cost/case for any ocular disease identified was $273. Conclusion Glaucoma examinations delivered through this programme provided significant health benefit to hard-to-reach communities. On a per-person basis, examinations were fairly low cost, though opportunities exist to improve efficiency. Findings serve as an important benchmark for planning future community-based glaucoma examination programmes.

PURPOSE: To examine the prevalence of 13 chronic conditions and fair/poor health among people aged >= 65 years in the United States with and without vision impairment.DESIGN: Cross-sectional study from the 2010-2014 National Health Interview Survey.METHODS: We examined hypertension, heart disease, high cholesterol, stroke, arthritis, asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, cancer, weak/failing kidneys, diabetes, hepatitis, depression, and hearing impairment. We used logistic regression to show the association between vision impairment and chronic conditions and the association between vision impairment and poor health for those with chronic conditions.RESULTS: People aged >= 65 years with vision impairment reported greater prevalence of chronic conditions compared to people without vision impairment. After controlling for covariates (age, sex, education, race, smoking, physical activity, and obesity), people with vision impairment were more likely than those without to report chronic conditions (hypertension: OR [odds ratio] 1.43; heart disease: OR 1.68; high cholesterol: OR 1.26; stroke: OR 1.99; arthritis; OR 1.71; asthma: OR 1.56; chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: OR 1.65; cancer: OR 1.23; weak/failing kidneys: OR 2.29; diabetes: OR 1.56; hepatitis: OR 1.30; depression: OR 1.47; hearing impairment: OR 1.91) (all P < .05). Among older people with chronic conditions, those with vision impairment and chronic conditions compared to people without vision impairment and chronic conditions were 1.66-2.98 times more likely to have fair/poor health than those without vision impairment (all P < .05).CONCLUSION: Higher prevalence of chronic conditions is strongly associated with vision impairment among the older people and poor health is strongly associated with vision impairment and chronic conditions. Published by Elsevier Inc.

PURPOSE:To develop, implement, and evaluate a replicable community-based screening intervention designed to improve glaucoma and other eye disease detection and follow-up care in high-risk populations in the United States. We present the design of the study and describe the findings of the first year of the program.DESIGN:Prospective study to evaluate screening and follow-up.METHODS:This is an ongoing study to develop an eye screening program using trained personnel to identify individuals with ophthalmic needs, focusing on African Americans ≥50 years of age at multiple inner-city community sites in Baltimore, Maryland. The screening examination uses a sequential referral approach and assesses presenting visual acuity (VA), best-corrected VA, digital fundus imaging, visual field testing, and measurement of intraocular pressure.RESULTS:We screened 901 individuals between January 2015 and October 2015. Subjects were mostly African Americans (94.9%) with a mean (standard deviation) age of 64.3 (9.9) years. Among them, 356 (39.5%) participants were referred for a definitive eye examination and 107 (11.9%) only needed prescription glasses. The most common reasons for referral were ungradable fundus image (39.3% of those referred), best-corrected VA < 20/40 (14.6%), and ungradable autorefraction (11.8%). Among people referred for definitive examination, 153 (43%) people attended their scheduled examination. The most common diagnoses at the definitive examination were glaucoma and cataract (51% and 40%, respectively).CONCLUSIONS:A large proportion of individuals screened required ophthalmic services, particularly those who were older and less well educated. To reach and encourage these individuals to attend screenings and follow-up examinations, programs could develop innovative strategies and approaches.

INTRODUCTION:Glaucoma is a leading cause of vision loss and blindness in the U.S. Risk factors include African American race, older age, family history of glaucoma, and diabetes. This paper describes the evaluation of a mobile eye health and a telemedicine program designed to improve access to eye care among people at high-risk for glaucoma.METHODS:The RE-AIM (reach, efficacy, adoption, implementation, and maintenance) evaluation framework was used to harmonize indicators. Both programs provided community-based eye health education and eye services related to glaucoma detection and care. Each program reported data on participants and community partners. An external evaluator conducted site visit interviews with program staff and community partners. Quantitative and qualitative data were integrated and analyzed using the RE-AIM dimensions.DISCUSSION:By targeting high-risk populations and providing comprehensive eye exams, both programs detected a large proportion of new glaucoma-related cases (17-19%) - a much larger proportion than that found in the general population (<2%). The educational intervention increased glaucoma knowledge; evidence that it led people to seek eye care was inconclusive.CONCLUSIONS:Evaluation findings from the mobile eye health program and the telemedicine program may provide useful information for wider implementation in public health clinics and in optometrist clinics located in retail outlets.

Purpose: To evaluate the detection rates of glaucoma-related diagnoses and the initial treatments received in the Philadelphia Glaucoma Detection and Treatment Project, a community-based initiative aimed at improving the detection, treatment, and follow-up care of individuals at risk for glaucoma.Design: Retrospective analysis.Participants: A total of 1649 individuals at risk for glaucoma who were examined and treated in 43 community centers located in underserved communities of Philadelphia.Methods: Individuals were enrolled if they were African American aged >= 50 years, were any other adult aged >= 60 years, or had a family history of glaucoma. After attending an informational glaucoma workshop, participants underwent a targeted glaucoma examination including an ocular, medical, and family history; visual acuity testing, intraocular pressure (IOP) measurement, and corneal pachymetry; slit-lamp and optic nerve examination; automated visual field testing; and fundus color photography. If indicated, treatments included selective laser trabeculoplasty (SLT), laser peripheral iridotomy (LPI), or IOP-lowering medications. Follow-up examinations were scheduled at the community sites after 4 to 6 weeks or 4 to 6 months, depending on the clinical scenario.Main Outcome Measures: Detection rates of glaucoma-related diagnoses and types of treatments administered.Results: Of the 1649 individuals enrolled, 645 (39.1%) received a glaucoma-related diagnosis; 20.0% (n = 330) were identified as open-angle glaucoma (OAG) suspects, 9.2% (n = 151) were identified as having narrow angles (or as a primary angle closure/suspect), and 10.0% (n = 164) were diagnosed with glaucoma, including 9.0% (n = 148) with OAG and 1.0% (n = 16) with angle-closure glaucoma. Overall, 39.0% (n = 64 of 164) of those diagnosed with glaucoma were unaware of their diagnosis. A total of 196 patients (11.9%) received glaucoma-related treatment, including 84 (5.1%) who underwent LPI, 13 (0.8%) who underwent SLT, and 103 (6.2%) who were prescribed IOP-lowering medication.Conclusions: Targeting individuals at risk for glaucoma in underserved communities in Philadelphia yielded a high detection rate (39.1%) of glaucoma-related diagnoses. Providing examinations and offering treatment, including first-line laser procedures, at community-based sites providing services to older adults are effective to improve access to eye care by underserved populations. (C) 2016 by the American Academy of Ophthalmology.

ABSTRACT Purpose: To examine the association of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) with severity of visual impairment among people aged 40–64 years. Methods: We used cross-sectional data from the 2006–2010 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System to examine six measures of HRQoL: self-reported health, physically unhealthy days, mentally unhealthy days, activity limitation days, life satisfaction, and disability. Visual impairment was categorized as no, a little, or moderate/severe. We examined the association between visual impairment and HRQoL using logistic regression accounting for the survey’s complex design. Results: Overall, 23.0% of the participants reported a little difficult seeing, while 16.8% reported moderate/severe difficulty seeing. People aged 40–64 years with moderate/severe visual impairment had more frequent (≥14) physically unhealthy days, mentally unhealthy days, and activity limitation days in the last 30 days, as well as greater life dissatisfaction, greater disability, and poorer health compared to people reporting no or a little visual impairment. After controlling for covariates (age, sex, marital status, race/ethnicity, education, income, state, year, health insurance, heart disease, stroke, heart attack, body mass index, leisure-time activity, smoking, and medical care costs), and compared to people with no visual impairment, those with moderate/severe visual impairment were more likely to have fair/poor health (odds ratio, OR, 2.01, 95% confidence interval, CI, 1.82–2.23), life dissatisfaction (OR 2.06, 95% CI 1.80–2.35), disability (OR 1.95, 95% CI 1.80–2.13), and frequent physically unhealthy days (OR 1.69, 95% CI 1.52–1.88), mentally unhealthy days (OR 1.84, 95% CI 1.66–2.05), and activity limitation days (OR 1.94, 95% CI 1.71–2.20; all p < 0.0001). Conclusion: Poor HRQoL was strongly associated with moderate/severe visual impairment among people aged 40–64 years.

In 2014, an estimated 2.8 million persons aged ≥65 years in the United States reported severe vision impairment* defined as being blind or having severe difficulty seeing, even with eyeglasses. Good vision is important for maintaining balance as well as for identifying low-contrast hazards, estimating distances, and discerning spatial relationships. Conversely, having poor vision increases the risk for falls (1,2). Falls among older adults are common and can cause serious injuries, disabilities, and premature death (1,3). To date, no state-level investigations have examined the annual prevalence of falls among persons with and without severe vision impairment. CDC analyzed data from the 2014 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) to estimate the state-specific annual prevalence of falls among persons aged ≥65 years with and without self-reported severe vision impairment. Overall, 46.7% of persons with, and 27.7% of older adults without, self-reported severe vision impairment reported having fallen during the previous year. The state-specific annual prevalence of falls among persons aged ≥65 years with severe vision impairment ranged from 30.8% (Hawaii) to 59.1% (California). In contrast, the prevalence of falls among persons aged ≥65 years without severe vision impairment ranged from 20.4% (Hawaii) to 32.4% (Alaska). Developing fall-prevention interventions intended for persons with severe vision impairment will help states manage the impact of vision impairment and falls on health care resources, and can inform state-specific fall prevention initiatives.

Purpose To assess the impact of the education program of the Eye Care Quality and Accessibility Improvement in the Community (EQUALITY) telemedicine program on at-risk patients’ knowledge about glaucoma and attitudes about eye care as well as to assess patient satisfaction with EQUALITY. Patients and methods New or existing patients presenting for a comprehensive eye exam (CEE) at one of two retail-based primary eye clinics were enrolled based on ≥1 of the following at-risk criteria for glaucoma: African Americans ≥40 years of age, Whites ≥50 years of age, diabetes, family history of glaucoma, and/or preexisting diagnosis of glaucoma. A total of 651 patients were enrolled. A questionnaire was administered prior to the patients’ CEE and prior to the patients receiving any of the evidence-based eye health education program; a follow-up questionnaire was administered 2–4 weeks later by phone. Baseline and follow-up patient responses regarding knowledge about glaucoma and attitudes about eye care were compared using McNemar’s test. Logistic regression models were used to assess the association of patient-level characteristics with improvement in knowledge and attitudes. Overall patient satisfaction was summarized. Results At follow-up, all patient responses in the knowledge and attitude domains significantly improved from baseline (P≤0.01 for all questions). Those who were unemployed (odds ratio =0.63, 95% confidence interval =0.42–0.95, P=0.026) or had lower education (odds ratio =0.55, 95% confidence interval =0.29–1.02, P=0.058) were less likely to improve their knowledge after adjusting for age, sex, race, and prior glaucoma diagnosis. This association was attenuated after further adjustment for other patient-level characteristics. Ninety-eight percent (n=501) of patients reported being likely to have a CEE within the next 2 years, whereas 63% (n=326) had a CEE in the previous 2 years. Patient satisfaction with EQUALITY was high (99%). Conclusion Improved knowledge about glaucoma and a high intent to pursue eye care may lead to improved detection of early disease, thus lowering the risk of blindness.