Prevalence of uncorrected distance refractive errors and associated risk factors in employees of an academic centre

ABSTRACT

Background

Uncorrected refractive error (RE) may affect the work performance of adults in the workplace. The aim of current study was to determine the prevalence of corrected and uncorrected RE, and the determinants of uncorrected RE in adult employees of a university.

Methods

This was a cross-sectional study of Tehran University Medical Sciences’ staff. Besides demographic and some specific questionnaires, ophthalmic examinations including the measurement of uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA), best spectacles corrected visual acuity (BCVA), and presenting visual acuity were performed for all participants. The need for spectacles was defined as UCVA worse than 6/12 in the better eye that could be corrected to better than 6/12 with spectacles based on subjective refraction.

Results

In total, 4460 individuals with mean age of 42.32 ± 8.80 were included in the study. The VA of the better eye was 0.01 ± 0.05 logMAR for BCVA, 0.13 ± 0.26 for UCVA, and 0.05 ± 0.12 for presenting VA. Prevalence of RE was 15.7%, including uncorrected RE of 5% and spectacles coverage (corrected RE) of 10.7%. The proportion of individuals with elementary education and poor-fair status of general health were 1.62 times higher in the uncorrected group. In the univariate analysis, type of occupation (office versus non-office workers), socioeconomic status, and insurance of employees were not related to uncorrected RE (all P > 0.4). Myopia was the only factor associated with uncorrected RE in logistic regression analysis (odds ratio = 2.73, 95%CI = 1.02–7.31, P = 0.04).

Conclusion

The prevalence of uncorrected RE and spectacle coverage were 5% and 10.7%, respectively. Myopia was almost three times more likely to be associated among employees with uncorrected RE.

KEYWORDS:

• Uncorrected refractive errors

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Additional information

Funding

This study was supported and was carried out by the cooperation of Tehran University of Medical Sciences employee’s cohort (TEC) study.