December 2002
Volume 43, Issue 13
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   December 2002
Ophthalmic Care for Prison Inmates
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • TT Wu
    Ophthalmology Medical College Virginia Richmond VA
  • CT Leffler
    Medical College of Virginia Richmond VA
  • DA Pastel
    Medical College of Virginia Richmond VA
  • SG Schwartz
    Medical College of Virginia Richmond VA
  • RC Allen
    Medical College of Virginia Richmond VA
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships   T.T. Wu, None; C.T. Leffler, None; D.A. Pastel, None; S.G. Schwartz, None; R.C. Allen, None.
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science December 2002, Vol.43, 346. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      TT Wu, CT Leffler, DA Pastel, SG Schwartz, RC Allen; Ophthalmic Care for Prison Inmates . Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2002;43(13):346.

      Download citation file:

      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

  • Supplements

Abstract: : Purpose: To compare the differences in ophthalmic care between prison inmates and non-inmate patients at an urban eye clinic. Methods: 193 consecutive inmates were given complete eye examinations at our institution between January 1, 2001 and October 31, 2001. They were compared with 200 consecutive non-incarcerated «control» patients. Results: The inmates were more likely to be young (mean age 43 vs. 56, p < 0.001) and male (84% vs. 37%, p < 0.001), but less likely to be African-American (52% vs. 77%, p < 0.001) or diabetic (21% vs. 40%, p < 0.001) than control patients. There were no statistically significant differences between groups with regard to history of HIV infection, glaucoma, or acute eye trauma. Inmates were less likely to have had prior intraocular surgery (22% vs. 33%, p = 0.02). The most common diagnoses for inmates were primary open-angle glaucoma (9.0%), myopia (8.0%), and glaucoma suspect (6.0%). The most common diagnoses for controls were primary open-angle glaucoma (13%), proliferative diabetic retinopathy (9.0%), and post-operative cataract extraction (8.0%). There were no differences between groups with regard to recommendations for cataract surgery, glaucoma surgery, or vitreoretinal surgery. Diabetic inmates were less likely to present with retinopathy requiring laser photocoagulation than non-inmate diabetics (4.0% vs. 11%, p = 0.01). Conclusions: A high prevalence of glaucoma is documented in an inmate population, as well as younger age and male gender. In our clinic, inmates appear to have good access to ophthalmic care and do not represent a more severe case mix than non-inmates.

Keywords: 354 clinical (human) or epidemiologic studies: prevalence/incidence • 351 clinical (human) or epidemiologic studies: health care delivery/economics/manpower 

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.