Physical activity, time spent outdoors, and near work in relation to myopia prevalence, incidence, and progression:An overview of systematic reviews and meta-analyses

Myopia has reached epidemic levels in recent years. Stopping the development and progression of myopia is critical, as high myopia is a major cause of blindness worldwide. This overview aims at finding the association of time spent outdoors (TSO), near work (NW), and physical activity (PA) with the incidence, prevalence, and progression of myopia in children. Literature search was conducted in PubMed, Scopus, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, ProQuest, and Web of Science databases. Systematic reviews (SR) and meta-analyses (MA) on the TSO, NW, and PA in relation to myopia were reviewed. Methodological nature of qualified studies were evaluated utilizing the Risk of Bias in Systematic Review tool. We identified four SRs out of which three had MA, which included 62 unique studies, involving >1,00,000 children. This overview found a protective trend toward TSO with a pooled odds ratio (OR) of 0.982 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.979-0.985, I 2 = 93.5%, P < 0.001) per extra hour of TSO every week. A pooled OR 1.14 (95% CI 1.08-1.20) suggested NW to be related to risk of myopia. However, studies associating myopia with NW activities are not necessarily a causality as the effect of myopia might force children to indoor confinement with more NW and less TSO. PA presented no effect on myopia. Though the strength of evidence is less because of high heterogeneity and lack of clinical trials with clear definition, increased TSO and reduced NW are protective against myopia development among nonmyopes

An Insight into Knowledge, Perspective, and Practices of Indian Optometrists towards Childhood Myopia

The current understanding of clinical approaches and barriers in managing childhood myopia among Indian optometrists is limited. This research underscores the necessity and relevance of evidence-based practice guidelines by exploring their knowledge, attitude, and practice towards childhood myopia. A self-administered internet-based 26-item survey was circulated online among practicing optometrists in India. The questions assessed the demographics, knowledge, self-reported clinical practice behavior, barriers, source of information guiding their management, and extent of adult caregiver engagement for childhood myopia. Of 393 responses, a significant proportion of respondents (32.6–92.4%) were unaware of the ocular complications associated with high myopia, with less than half (46.5%) routinely performing ocular biometry in clinical practice. Despite the growing awareness of emerging myopia management options, the uptake remains generally poor, with single-vision distance full-correction spectacles (70.3%) being the most common mode of vision correction. Barriers to adopting optimal myopia care are medicolegal concerns, absence of clinical practice guidelines, and inadequate consultation time. Own clinical experience and original research articles were the primary sources of information supporting clinical practice. Most (>70%) respondents considered involving the adult caregiver in their child’s clinical decision-making process. While practitioners’ awareness and activity of newer myopia management strategies are improving, there is plenty of scope for its enhancement. The importance of evidence-based practice guidelines and continuing education on myopia control might help practitioners enhance their clinical decision-making skills

Association of sunlight exposure with visual impairment in an Indian fishing community

Purpose: Indian fishermen belong to a marginalized population and are continuously exposed to extreme occupational hazards and sunlight. A high prevalence of visual impairment (VI) is reported in the coastal fishing community. We aimed to investigate the association between VI with sunlight exposure measurement (SEM). Methods: In this cross-sectional observational study, 270 eyes of 135 participants were enrolled from a coastal fishing village. Participants underwent a comprehensive ophthalmic examination which included best-corrected visual acuity, anterior and posterior segment examination. Ocular surface disease index (OSDI) and SEM questionnaire were administered to estimate the level of dry eye and ultraviolet-B exposure respectively. VI was defined as presenting visual acuity worse than 6/12 33 (LogMAR >0.3). Results: Mean age and spherical equivalent were 50.56 ± 11.72 years (range: 18 to 80 years) and 0.36 35 ± 1.68 diopters (D) (range: -7 to +3.0 D), respectively. Age, SEM, OSDI, fishing as an occupation, and 36 cataract were significantly associated with higher odds of VI in univariate analysis. Refraction, gender, education level, smoking status, amblyopia, systematic and other ocular diseases were not significantly associated with VI. In the multivariate analysis, age, SEM, and cataract remained significantly associated with a higher risk for VI. Area under-curve values for age and SEM scores demonstrate a fair index of discrimination for the detection of VI. Conclusion: SEM level is directly associated with a greater risk of VI among fishermen. The fishing community might benefit from regular eye examinations, awareness about the harmful effects of sunlight exposure, and preventive measures

Design and development of a noninvasive ocular pressure estimator

Significance: A snapshot intraocular pressure (IOP) is ineffective in identifying the IOP peak and fluctuation, especially during sleep. Since IOP variability play a significant role in the progression of glaucoma, 34 monitoring the IOP, especially during sleep is essential to capture the dynamic nature of IOP. Purpose: We aimed to design an ocular pressure estimator (OPE) that can reliably and accurately measure the IOP non-invasively over closed eyelid condition. Methods: OPE works on the principle that the external pressure applied by raising the intraocular pressure of the eyeball is transmitted through a compressible septum to the pressure sensor, thus recording the IOP. A fluid-filled pouch with a pressure sensor was placed over a rubber glove mimicking the eyelid (septum), covering the cornea of enucleated goat eyeballs. A pressure controlled setup was connected to a goat cadaver eye which was validated by a rebound tonometer. Cannulation of eyeballs through the lower limbus had the least difference from the control setup values documented using rebound tonometer, compared to cannulation through the optic nerve. Intraocular pressures ranging from 3–30 mmHg was induced, and the outputs recorded using OPE were amplified and recorded for 10 minutes (n=10 eyes). We stratified the randomization of the number of times and the induced pressures. Results: The measurements recorded were found to be linear when measured against an intraocular pressure range of 3–30 mmHg. The device has excellent reliability (Intraclass correlation coefficient 0.998). The repeatability coefficient and coefficient of variations were 4.24 (3.60–4.87) and 8.61% (7.33–9.90), respectively. The overall mean difference ±SD between induced IOP and the OPE was 0.22 ± 3.50 (95% confidence interval: -0.35, 0.79) mmHg across all IOP ranges. Conclusion: OPE offers a promising approach for reliably and accurately measuring IOP and its fluctuation non invasively under condition mimicking closed eye

Management of coronary disease in patients with advanced kidney disease

BACKGROUND Clinical trials that have assessed the effect of revascularization in patients with stable coronary disease have routinely excluded those with advanced chronic kidney disease. METHODS We randomly assigned 777 patients with advanced kidney disease and moderate or severe ischemia on stress testing to be treated with an initial invasive strategy consisting of coronary angiography and revascularization (if appropriate) added to medical therapy or an initial conservative strategy consisting of medical therapy alone and angiography reserved for those in whom medical therapy had failed. The primary outcome was a composite of death or nonfatal myocardial infarction. A key secondary outcome was a composite of death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or hospitalization for unstable angina, heart failure, or resuscitated cardiac arrest. RESULTS At a median follow-up of 2.2 years, a primary outcome event had occurred in 123 patients in the invasive-strategy group and in 129 patients in the conservative-strategy group (estimated 3-year event rate, 36.4% vs. 36.7%; adjusted hazard ratio, 1.01; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.79 to 1.29; P=0.95). Results for the key secondary outcome were similar (38.5% vs. 39.7%; hazard ratio, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.79 to 1.29). The invasive strategy was associated with a higher incidence of stroke than the conservative strategy (hazard ratio, 3.76; 95% CI, 1.52 to 9.32; P=0.004) and with a higher incidence of death or initiation of dialysis (hazard ratio, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.04 to 2.11; P=0.03). CONCLUSIONS Among patients with stable coronary disease, advanced chronic kidney disease, and moderate or severe ischemia, we did not find evidence that an initial invasive strategy, as compared with an initial conservative strategy, reduced the risk of death or nonfatal myocardial infarction

Health status after invasive or conservative care in coronary and advanced kidney disease

BACKGROUND In the ISCHEMIA-CKD trial, the primary analysis showed no significant difference in the risk of death or myocardial infarction with initial angiography and revascularization plus guideline-based medical therapy (invasive strategy) as compared with guideline-based medical therapy alone (conservative strategy) in participants with stable ischemic heart disease, moderate or severe ischemia, and advanced chronic kidney disease (an estimated glomerular filtration rate of &lt;30 ml per minute per 1.73 m2 or receipt of dialysis). A secondary objective of the trial was to assess angina-related health status. METHODS We assessed health status with the Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ) before randomization and at 1.5, 3, and 6 months and every 6 months thereafter. The primary outcome of this analysis was the SAQ Summary score (ranging from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating less frequent angina and better function and quality of life). Mixed-effects cumulative probability models within a Bayesian framework were used to estimate the treatment effect with the invasive strategy. RESULTS Health status was assessed in 705 of 777 participants. Nearly half the participants (49%) had had no angina during the month before randomization. At 3 months, the estimated mean difference between the invasive-strategy group and the conservative-strategy group in the SAQ Summary score was 2.1 points (95% credible interval, 120.4 to 4.6), a result that favored the invasive strategy. The mean difference in score at 3 months was largest among participants with daily or weekly angina at baseline (10.1 points; 95% credible interval, 0.0 to 19.9), smaller among those with monthly angina at baseline (2.2 points; 95% credible interval, 122.0 to 6.2), and nearly absent among those without angina at baseline (0.6 points; 95% credible interval, 121.9 to 3.3). By 6 months, the between-group difference in the overall trial population was attenuated (0.5 points; 95% credible interval, 122.2 to 3.4). CONCLUSIONS Participants with stable ischemic heart disease, moderate or severe ischemia, and advanced chronic kidney disease did not have substantial or sustained benefits with regard to angina-related health status with an initially invasive strategy as compared with a conservative strategy

Health-status outcomes with invasive or conservative care in coronary disease

BACKGROUND In the ISCHEMIA trial, an invasive strategy with angiographic assessment and revascularization did not reduce clinical events among patients with stable ischemic heart disease and moderate or severe ischemia. A secondary objective of the trial was to assess angina-related health status among these patients. METHODS We assessed angina-related symptoms, function, and quality of life with the Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ) at randomization, at months 1.5, 3, and 6, and every 6 months thereafter in participants who had been randomly assigned to an invasive treatment strategy (2295 participants) or a conservative strategy (2322). Mixed-effects cumulative probability models within a Bayesian framework were used to estimate differences between the treatment groups. The primary outcome of this health-status analysis was the SAQ summary score (scores range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better health status). All analyses were performed in the overall population and according to baseline angina frequency. RESULTS At baseline, 35% of patients reported having no angina in the previous month. SAQ summary scores increased in both treatment groups, with increases at 3, 12, and 36 months that were 4.1 points (95% credible interval, 3.2 to 5.0), 4.2 points (95% credible interval, 3.3 to 5.1), and 2.9 points (95% credible interval, 2.2 to 3.7) higher with the invasive strategy than with the conservative strategy. Differences were larger among participants who had more frequent angina at baseline (8.5 vs. 0.1 points at 3 months and 5.3 vs. 1.2 points at 36 months among participants with daily or weekly angina as compared with no angina). CONCLUSIONS In the overall trial population with moderate or severe ischemia, which included 35% of participants without angina at baseline, patients randomly assigned to the invasive strategy had greater improvement in angina-related health status than those assigned to the conservative strategy. The modest mean differences favoring the invasive strategy in the overall group reflected minimal differences among asymptomatic patients and larger differences among patients who had had angina at baseline

Initial invasive or conservative strategy for stable coronary disease

BACKGROUND Among patients with stable coronary disease and moderate or severe ischemia, whether clinical outcomes are better in those who receive an invasive intervention plus medical therapy than in those who receive medical therapy alone is uncertain. METHODS We randomly assigned 5179 patients with moderate or severe ischemia to an initial invasive strategy (angiography and revascularization when feasible) and medical therapy or to an initial conservative strategy of medical therapy alone and angiography if medical therapy failed. The primary outcome was a composite of death from cardiovascular causes, myocardial infarction, or hospitalization for unstable angina, heart failure, or resuscitated cardiac arrest. A key secondary outcome was death from cardiovascular causes or myocardial infarction. RESULTS Over a median of 3.2 years, 318 primary outcome events occurred in the invasive-strategy group and 352 occurred in the conservative-strategy group. At 6 months, the cumulative event rate was 5.3% in the invasive-strategy group and 3.4% in the conservative-strategy group (difference, 1.9 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.8 to 3.0); at 5 years, the cumulative event rate was 16.4% and 18.2%, respectively (difference, 121.8 percentage points; 95% CI, 124.7 to 1.0). Results were similar with respect to the key secondary outcome. The incidence of the primary outcome was sensitive to the definition of myocardial infarction; a secondary analysis yielded more procedural myocardial infarctions of uncertain clinical importance. There were 145 deaths in the invasive-strategy group and 144 deaths in the conservative-strategy group (hazard ratio, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.83 to 1.32). CONCLUSIONS Among patients with stable coronary disease and moderate or severe ischemia, we did not find evidence that an initial invasive strategy, as compared with an initial conservative strategy, reduced the risk of ischemic cardiovascular events or death from any cause over a median of 3.2 years. The trial findings were sensitive to the definition of myocardial infarction that was used