Læknablaðið - 15.03.1987, Blaðsíða 16

82
LÆKNABLAÐIÐ
Fig. 5. Refractive causes for standard reading glasses
being unsuitable (>0.75D) for 32.1% of examined
persons
Frequency in %
Interpupillary distance in mm
Fig. 6. Distribution of interpupillary distance
measurements for near in mm (n = 555)
að helmingi tilfella fær viðkomandi gleraugu, sem
hann getur ekki notað eða aðeins notað mjög
takmarkað, þ.e. til að bregða upp stutta stund,
jafnvel þó hann velji í öllum tilvikum það sem
honum hentar best, af því sem boðið er, sem þó er
óhugsandi. Stöðluð lesgleraugu eru einnig spor
afturábak í heilsugæslu og forvarnarstarfi, ef þau
verða til þess að alvarlegir augnsjúkdómar finnast
síðar en ella.
Þakkir: Vísindasjóður hefur styrkt þetta verkefni.
SUMMARY
One of the authors travelled three times a year during
1982 through 1984 providing ophthalmic services for a
rural area in the Eastern Region of Iceland. By the lst of
December 1982 the population 43 years of age and older
was 925 persons. This age group is likely to require
reading glasses. 751 persons, i.e. 81.2%, had eye
examination including visual acuity tests. 730 persons
were refracted i.e. 71.9% (Fig. 1), and interpupillary
distance for near was mesured for 555 persons, i.e. 60%
of the population. The results (see Figures) were used to
estimate the suitability and usefulness of standard
supermarket glasses.
In 32.1% of the cases, standard reading glasses were
found to be unsuitable because of refraction (Fig. 5) and
in 14.2% of the cases glasses with appropriate
interpupillary distance were unavailable in the store.
Thus almost half of the examined persons would not
have found suitable glasses even if they had been correct
in their selection in all instances, which is impossible.
In Iceland refraction is exclusively performed by
ophthalmologists who at the same time provide a
comprehensive screening for ocular disease. It was
found, that sale of standard reading glasses, without
consulting an ophthalmologist, is likely to delay
detection of ocular disease and its treatment. This
applies particularly to chronic simple glaucoma,
diabetic retinopathy, retinal holes and neovascular
macular disease. The consequences thereof are likely to
be, increased hospitalization because of more severe eye
disease and increased number of legally blind and
partially sighted persons.
HEIMILDIR
1. Gögn frá Hagstofu fslands.
2. Björnsson G. Augnhagur Borgfirðinga.
Læknaneminn 1978; 31: 5-18.
3. Fledelius HC. Is myopia getting more frequent?
Acta Ophthal 1983; 61: 545-59.
4. Kahn HA, Leibowitz HM, Ganley JP, Kini MM,
Colton T, Nickerson RS, Dawber TR. The
Framingham Eye Study. Am J Epidemiol 1977;
106: 17-32.
5. Jónasson, F. Sjónbætandi aðgerðir með
gerviaugasteinum. Læknablaðið 1987; 73: 83-4.
6. Leibowitz HM, Krueger DE, Maunder LR, et al.
The Framingham Eye Study Monograph. Surv
Ophthalmol 1980; 24: (suppl.)
7. Duke-Elders Practice of Refraction, revised by D.
Abrams. 9th ed. Edinburgh, London, New York:
Churchill Livingston, 1978; 58.
8. Fledelius HC. Prevalences of Astigmatism and
Anisometropia in adult Danes. Acta Ophthalmol
Scand 1984; 62: 391-400.
9. Kronfeld PC, Devney C. The Frequency of
Astigmatism. Arch Ophthalmol 1930; 4: 873-84.
10. Helveston EM, Ellis FD. Pediatric Ophthalmology
Practice. 2nd ed. St. Louis, Toronto: The C.V.
Mosby Company, 1984; 77.
11. Anonymus. Editorial: Spectacle Problems. Brit
Med J 1980; 281: 1586-7.
12. RJHS. Editorial: Are their spectacles really
necessary? Brit J Ophthalmol 1985; 69: 873.
13. Björnsson G, Viggósson G, Ingvarsson JG. Gláka á
íslandi. Læknablaðið 1984; 70: 156-9.
14. Björnsson G. Blindness in Iceland. Acta
Ophthalmol Scand 1981; 59: 921-7.
15. Schwarz B. Changing Perspectives on Screening for
Ocular Disease. Surv Ophthalmol 1983; 28: 141-3.