Cargando…
Association of vision impairment and blindness with socioeconomic status in adults 50 years and older from Alto Amazonas, Peru
OBJECTIVE: To determine the relationship between socioeconomic status (SES) and visual impairment (VI) or blindness in the rural Peruvian Amazon, hypothesizing that higher SES would have a protective effect on the odds of VI or blindness. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study of 16 rural communitie...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Nature Publishing Group UK
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9905540/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35115717 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41433-021-01870-x |
Sumario: | OBJECTIVE: To determine the relationship between socioeconomic status (SES) and visual impairment (VI) or blindness in the rural Peruvian Amazon, hypothesizing that higher SES would have a protective effect on the odds of VI or blindness. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study of 16 rural communities in the Peruvian Amazon, consenting adults aged ≥ 50 years were recruited from ~30 randomly selected households per village. Each household was administered a questionnaire and had a SES score constructed using principal components analysis. Blindness and VI were determined using a ministry of health 3-meter visual acuity card. RESULTS: Overall, 207 adults aged ≥ 50 were eligible; 146 (70.5%) completed visual acuity screening and answered the questionnaire. Of those 146 participants who completed presenting visual acuity screening, 57 (39.0%, 95% CI 30.2–47.1) were classified as visually impaired and 6 (4.1%, 95% CI 0.9–7.3) as blind. Belonging to the highest SES tercile had a protective effect on VI or blindness (OR 0.29, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.91, p = 0.034), with a linear trend across decreasing levels of SES (p = 0.019). This observed effect remained significant regardless of how SES groups were assigned. CONCLUSION: Belonging to a higher SES group resulted in a lower odds of VI or blindness compared to those in the lowest SES group. The observation of a dose response provides confidence in the observed association, but causality remains unclear. Blindness prevention programs could maximize impact by designing activities that specifically target people with lower SES. |
---|