RESUMO
CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Well-targeted referrals and timely commencement of treatment are essential to limiting vision loss in glaucoma. Optometrists, primary care providers, and public health policymakers can utilise predictors of late to identify and target at-risk populations. BACKGROUND: This study, which aimed to evaluate glaucoma severity at first presentation to an ophthalmologist in a rural Australian population, is the first of its kind in an Australian population. METHODS: Patient records from a large ophthalmology clinic in Port Macquarie, NSW were retrospectively reviewed using the Fight Glaucoma Blindness registry to identify patients who were first diagnosed with glaucoma at an ophthalmology practice in 2020 or 2021. Associations with glaucoma severity at presentation, measured with visual field index (VFI), were analysed using a beta-regression model. Retinal nerve fibre layer measurements were evaluated as a secondary outcome measure using linear regression. RESULTS: From 3548 new patients seen, 110 cases of glaucoma were diagnosed, 95 of whom met inclusion criteria. These comprised 41.8% primary open-angle glaucoma, 32.7% normal-tension glaucoma, 11.8% secondary open-angle glaucoma, 12.7% primary angle closure glaucoma, and 0.9% secondary angle closure glaucoma. The median VFI at presentation was 94.5%, and 71.9% of patients had a VFI ≥ 90%. However, 6.3% of patients presented with a VFI below 50%. Older age, higher intraocular pressure, and worse visual acuity were significantly associated with severity at presentation. No associations were found for remoteness, sex, family history, or glaucoma type. CONCLUSIONS: Glaucoma appears to be diagnosed relatively early in this population. Severity at presentation was associated with age, intraocular pressure, and visual acuity, but not influenced by the social determinants assessed. These findings underscore the importance of frequent comprehensive eye examinations in older patients. Replication in other Australian populations is recommended as the generalisability of these findings is limited.
RESUMO
PRCIS: This systematic review has revealed that variable definitions of glaucoma continue to be used in prevalence studies, despite the introduction of the International Society of Geographic and Epidemiologic Ophthalmology (ISGEO) criteria. PURPOSE: To systematically review diagnostic criteria and examinations performed in glaucoma prevalence studies over time and determine the quality of reporting. Accurate estimates of glaucoma prevalence are crucial to inform resource allocation. However, diagnosis of glaucoma comprises inherently subjective examinations and the cross-sectional nature of prevalence studies precludes monitoring for progression. METHODS: A systematic review of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Scopus was performed to examine diagnostic protocols used by glaucoma prevalence studies and evaluate uptake of the ISGEO criteria, introduced in 2002 to standardize glaucoma diagnosis in prevalence studies. Detection bias and compliance with the Strengthening Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) guidelines were evaluated. RESULTS: Ten thousand five hundred forty-four articles were identified. After deduplication, 5589 articles were screened, yielding 136 articles pertaining to 123 studies. An absence of data in many countries was identified. Ninety-two percent of studies stated diagnostic criteria, and 62% used the ISGEO criteria since their publication. Weaknesses of the ISGEO criteria were identified. Temporal variations in the performance of various examinations were observed, including heterogeneity in angle assessment. Mean STROBE compliance was 82% (range 59-100%); 72 articles had a low risk of detection bias, 4 had a high risk, and 60 had some concerns. CONCLUSION: Heterogeneous diagnostic definitions persist in glaucoma prevalence studies, despite introduction of the ISGEO criteria. Standardization of criteria remains imperative and the development of new criteria represent a valuable opportunity to achieve this goal. In addition, methods of determining diagnoses are poorly reported, suggesting a need for improvement in study conduct and reporting. Accordingly, we propose the Reporting of quality Of GlaUcoma Epidemiological Studies (ROGUES) Checklist. We have also identified a need for further prevalence studies in regions with limited data and to update Australian angle closure glaucoma prevalence. Design and reporting of future studies can be informed by this review's insights into diagnostic protocols previously used.
