71
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    1
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Prevalence of dry eye syndrome among US women

      , , ,
      American Journal of Ophthalmology
      Elsevier BV

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Dry eye syndrome (DES) is believed to be one of the most common ocular problems in the United States (US), particularly among older women. However, there are few studies describing the magnitude of the problem in women and how this may vary with demographic characteristics. Cross-sectional prevalence survey. we surveyed 39,876 US women participating in the Women's Health Study about a history of diagnosed DES and dry eye symptoms. we defined DES as the presence of clinically diagnosed DES or severe symptoms (both dryness and irritation constantly or often). We calculated the age-specific prevalence of DES and adjusted the overall prevalence to the age distribution of women in the US population. We used logistic regression to examine associations between DES and other demographic factors. The prevalence of DES increased with age, from 5.7% among women < 50 years old to 9.8% among women aged > or = 75 years old. The age-adjusted prevalence of DES was 7.8%, or 3.23 million women aged > or = 50 in the US. Compared with Whites, Hispanic (odds ratio [OR] = 1.81, confidence interval [CI] = 1.18-2.80) and Asian (OR = 1.77, CI = 1.17-2.69) women were more likely to report severe symptoms, but not clinically diagnosed DES. There were no significant differences by income (P([trend]) =.78), but more educated women were less likely to have DES (P([trend]) =.03). Women from the South had the highest prevalence of DES, though the magnitude of geographic differences was modest. Dry eye syndrome leading to a clinical diagnosis or severe symptoms is prevalent, affecting over 3.2 million American women middle-aged and older. Although the condition is more prevalent among older women, it also affects many women in their 40s and 50s. Further research is needed to better understand DES and its impact on public health and quality of life.

          Related collections

          Most cited references16

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Prevalence of dry eye among the elderly.

          To study the demographics and estimate the prevalence of dry eye among elderly Americans. A population-based prevalence study was performed in 2,520 residents of Salisbury, Maryland, aged 65 years and older as of September 1993. The population was derived from the Health Care Financing Administration Medicare database. After completing a standardized questionnaire pertaining to dry eye symptoms, 2,420 subjects underwent Schirmer and rose bengal tests and anatomic assessment of the meibomian glands. In this population, 14.6% (363/2,482) were symptomatic, defined as reporting one or more dry eye symptoms often or all the time; 2.2% (53/2,448) were symptomatic and had a low Schirmer test result ( or = 5). Furthermore, 3.5% (84/2,425) were symptomatic and had either a low Schirmer score or a high rose bengal score, and 0.7% (17/2,420) were symptomatic and had both a low Schirmer score and a high rose bengal score. No association of symptoms or signs was seen with age, sex, or race. Although anatomic features of meibomianitis were associated with the presence of symptoms (P = .01), 76% (67/88) of the individuals with these anatomic features were asymptomatic; 10.5% (260/2,480) reported that they currently use artificial tears or lubricants. Symptoms and signs of dry eye are common among the elderly but were not associated with age, race, or sex in this population-based sample of elderly Americans. Extrapolating to the United States population aged 65 to 84 years, the study yields an estimate of 4.3 million who experience symptoms of ocular irritation often or all the time.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            The epidemiology of dry eye in Melbourne, Australia.

            To describe the epidemiology of dry eye in the adult population of Melbourne, Australia. A cross-sectional prevalence study. Participants were recruited by a household census from two of nine clusters of the Melbourne Visual Impairment Project, a population-based study of age-related eye disease in the 40 and older age group of Melbourne, Australia. Nine hundred and twenty-six (82.3% of eligible) people participated; 433 (46.8%) were male. They ranged in age from 40 to 97 years, with a mean of 59.2 years. Self-reported symptoms of dry eye were elicited by an interviewer-administered questionnaire. Four objective assessments of dry eye were made: Schirmer's test, tear film breakup time, rose bengal staining, and fluorescein corneal staining. A standardized clinical slit-lamp examination was performed on all participants. Dry eye for the individual signs or symptoms was defined as: rose bengal > 3, Schirmers 1/3 fluorescein staining, and severe symptoms (3 on a scale of 0 to 3). Dry eye was diagnosed as follows: 10.8% by rose bengal, 16.3% by Schirmer's test, 8.6% by tear film breakup time, 1.5% by fluorescein staining, 7.4% with two or more signs, and 5.5% with any severe symptom not attributed to hay fever. Women were more likely to report severe symptoms of dry eye (odds ratio [OR] = 1.85; 95% confidence limits [CL] = 1.01, 3.41). Risk factors for two or more signs of dry eye include age (OR = 1.04; 95% CL = 1.01, 1.06), and self-report of arthritis (OR = 3.27; 95% CL = 1.74, 6.17). These results were not changed after excluding the 21 people (2.27%) who wore contact lenses. These are the first reported population-based data of dry eye in Australia. The prevalence of dry eye varies by sign and symptom.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Impaired functional visual acuity of dry eye patients.

              To report dry eye patients' functional visual acuity, which was measured after sustained eye opening for 10-20 seconds, as a simulation of visual function of daily acts of gazing, which is defined as looking at an object with involuntary blink suppression. Interventional clinical nonrandomized comparative trial. We measured ordinary best-corrected visual acuity and functional visual acuity in non-Sjögren's syndrome (non-SS, N = 10) and Sjögren's syndrome (SS, N = 12) patients and in normal controls (N = 8), prospectively. Surface regularity index (SRI) of corneal topography was also measured under routine circumstances and after sustained eye opening. Blink rates while gazing were measured during reading in another 28 dry eye patients and during driving in another 8 normal controls. Functional visual acuity did not change (1.27-1.16) in normal controls, but decreased significantly from 1.18-0.336 in non-SS patients (P = .0007) and from 1.15-0.228 (P < .00001) in SS patients. SRI after sustained eye opening increased in non-SS (P = .032) and SS patients (P = .0007), but not in the normal controls. Blink rates during reading (P < .001) and driving (P = .012) were significantly decreased from baseline blink rates. This study shows that the visual function of dry eye patients becomes abnormal with ocular surface irregularity when the eye is kept open for 10-20 seconds. Our data indicate impaired visual function in dry eye patients while gazing. Functional visual acuity may be important in daily activities.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                American Journal of Ophthalmology
                American Journal of Ophthalmology
                Elsevier BV
                00029394
                August 2003
                August 2003
                : 136
                : 2
                : 318-326
                Article
                10.1016/S0002-9394(03)00218-6
                12888056
                949c6fbd-1a83-49f6-b1e2-e634005a9005
                © 2003

                https://www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article