77
Views
21
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Research Paper

Prevalence of refractive error, presbyopia and spectacle coverage in Kahama District, Tanzania: a rapid assessment of refractive error

, Dip Optom, , MSc BOptom, , BSc BOptom, , BSc MPhil & , PhD OD
Pages 58-64 | Received 26 Mar 2014, Accepted 08 Jul 2014, Published online: 15 Apr 2021
 

Abstract

Background

In Tanzania, the prevalence of refractive error and presbyopia have not been comprehensively assessed, limiting appropriate planning and implementation of delivery of vision care. This study sought to determine the prevalence of refractive error and presbyopia, spectacle coverage and the barriers to uptake of refractive services in people aged 15 years and older in the Kahama district of Tanzania.

Methods

A cross‐sectional community‐based survey was conducted using 54 randomly selected clusters. Respondents 15 years and older were interviewed and underwent standardised clinical eye examinations. Uncorrected refractive error (URE) was defined as presenting vision worse than 6/12 that could be corrected to better than 6/12 using a pinhole. Spectacle coverage was defined as the proportion of need that was met (those that improved from unaided vision with their own spectacle correction).

Results

A total of 3,230 subjects (99.75 per cent of 3,240 eligible) participated in the study with 57.2 per cent males and the median age of participants was 35 years (inter‐quartile range, 24 to 49). The prevalence of visual impairment was 10.4 per cent (95% CI 9.4 to 11.4) and was lower in those who had completed their primary school education (odds ratio (OR) 0.54, 95% CI: 0.40 to 0.72) and highest in subjects 40 years and older (OR 3.17, 95% CI: 2.14 to 4.70) and farmers (OR 8.57 95% CI: 2.27 to 32.43). Refractive error prevalence was 7.5 per cent (95% CI: 6.65 to 8.54) and this was highest in participants over 40 years (OR 1.60, 95% CI: 1.14 to 2.25) and in students (OR 3.64, 95% CI: 1.35 to 9.86). Prevalence of presbyopia was 46.5 per cent (773/1,663, 95% CI: 44.34 to 48.75). Spectacle coverage for refractive error and presbyopia was 1.69% (95% CI: 0 to 3.29) and 0.42% (95% CI: 0 to 1.26), respectively.

Conclusion

Uncorrected refractive error is a public health challenge in the Kahama district and sustainable service delivery and health promotion efforts are needed.

Acknowledgement

The authors wish to thank Miss Rajeshwari Virendra Sagar, Mr Dishay Ravjee and Miss Mary Wepo for their contributions in the implementation of the study. The research is funded by the Brien Holden Vision Institute.

Additional information

Funding

Brien Holden Vision Institute

Log in via your institution

Log in to Taylor & Francis Online

PDF download + Online access

  • 48 hours access to article PDF & online version
  • Article PDF can be downloaded
  • Article PDF can be printed
USD 65.00 Add to cart

Purchase Issue

  • 30 days online access to complete issue
  • Article PDFs can be downloaded
  • Article PDFs can be printed
USD 84.00 Add to cart

* Local tax will be added as applicable

Related Research

People also read lists articles that other readers of this article have read.

Recommended articles lists articles that we recommend and is powered by our AI driven recommendation engine.

Cited by lists all citing articles based on Crossref citations.
Articles with the Crossref icon will open in a new tab.