Purchase this article with an account.
J. Wu, S. Azen, R. Klein, R. Varma, LALES Group; The Impact of Unilateral and Bilateral Visual Impairment on Self–Reported Vision Function: The Los Angeles Latino Eye Study (LALES) . Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2005;46(13):1914.
Download citation file:
© ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)
Purpose: To assess the association of unilateral and bilateral visual impairment (VI) with self–reported visual function in adult Latinos. Methods: Data were derived from the LALES, a population–based prevalence study of eye disease in Latinos aged 40 years and older, residing in Los Angeles, California. All participants completed a standardized interview, including the NEI–VFQ–25 to measure self–reported visual functioning, and a complete eye examination, including measurement of presenting monocular and binocular visual acuity. VI was defined as none (better than 20/40), mild (20/40–20/63), and moderate/severe (20/80 or worse) in one (unilateral) or both eyes (bilateral). NEI–VFQ–25 subscale and composite scores were stratified by severity of unilateral and bilateral VI. Analysis of covariance was used to determine any systematic differences between various combinations of unilateral and bilateral VI. All subscale and composite scores were adjusted for covariance. The covariance included age, gender, education, employment status, income, acculturation, comorbidities, depression, health insurance, and vision insurance. Results: 5,394 participants who completed the eye examination and in–home interview were included in this analysis. The average age of the participants was 55 years, and 59% were females. Participants with either mild bilateral VI, or unilateral moderate/severe VI, or moderate/severe bilateral VI had statistically significant lower and clinically meaningful subscale and composite scores (5 points or greater difference) when compared to those with no VI (p<0.05). The largest differences in subscale scores were noted between participants with bilateral moderate/severe VI and those with no VI in the Driving Difficulties subscale (51.5), Vision Specific Dependency subscale (38.3) and the Distance Vision subscale (34.5). No clinically meaningful differences for any of the NEI–VFQ subscale scores were found between participants with no VI and those with mild unilateral VI. Conclusions: In Latinos mild bilateral VI and moderate/severe unilateral and bilateral moderate/severe VI do have a significant and clinically meaningful impact on self–reported visual function. This impact needs to be considered when assessing visual disability and the need for intervention.
This PDF is available to Subscribers Only