Home › Research › Risk factors
Visual impairment in nursing home residents: the Blue Mountains Eye Study
Mitchell P, Hayes P, Wang JJ.. The Medical journal of Australia, 1997-01-01
Topic: Health services, long-term care and technology
Objectives To assess the prevalence and causes of visual impairment, and the proportion of treatable eye conditions, among nursing home residents. Design and setting The Blue Mountains Eye Study is a population-based survey of vision and common eye diseases in people aged 50 or older in two postcode areas west of Sydney. Nursing home examinations were conducted during 1993. Participants Three representative nursing homes were selected from the nine in the study area. There were 128 residents aged 50 or older (64% females), representing 21% of all eligible nursing home residents in the two postcode areas. Main outcome measure Blindness or visual impairment in one or both eyes. Results Eye examinations were refused by five nursing home residents, and dementia precluded eye examination in 34 (28%) of the remainder. We found significantly higher prevalences (fivefold increase) of bilateral (11%) and unilateral (21%) blindness in nursing home residents compared with local community residents (bilateral, 0.5%; unilateral, 2%). In seven of the 10 blind nursing home residents, the blindness was potentially reversible (advanced cataract); late age-related macular degeneration (AMD) was the second most frequent cause of blindness, affecting one or both eyes of 12% of residents. Open-angle glaucoma affected 10% and advanced cataract 11%; a history of past cataract surgery was obtained in 14%. Conclusions These data confirm earlier reports of a substantial number of treatable eye diseases, particularly advanced cataract, in nursing home residents, and indicate a need for increased surveillance of these communities. The high rate of visual impairment and blindness, compared with similar age groups in the local community, suggests that visual disability may contribute to nursing home placement.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Mitchell, P., Hayes, P., & Wang, J. J. (1997). Visual impairment in nursing home residents: the Blue Mountains Eye Study. The Medical journal of Australia. https://doi.org/10.5694/j.1326-5377.1997.tb138724.x
Vancouver
Mitchell P, Hayes P, Wang JJ. Visual impairment in nursing home residents: the Blue Mountains Eye Study. The Medical journal of Australia. 1997. doi:10.5694/j.1326-5377.1997.tb138724.x. PMID: 9033561.
BibTeX
@article{mitchell1997-9033561,
author = {Mitchell, P. and Hayes, P. and Wang, J. J.},
title = {{Visual impairment in nursing home residents: the Blue Mountains Eye Study}},
journal = {The Medical journal of Australia},
year = {1997},
doi = {10.5694/j.1326-5377.1997.tb138724.x},
pmid = {9033561},
url = {https://doi.org/10.5694/j.1326-5377.1997.tb138724.x}
}
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- Results Eye examinations were refused by five nursing home residents, and dementia precluded eye examination in 34 (28%) of the remainder.
- We found significantly higher prevalences (fivefold increase) of bilateral (11%) and unilateral (21%) blindness in nursing home residents compared with local community residents (bilateral, 0.5%; unilateral, 2%).
- The high rate of visual impairment and blindness, compared with similar age groups in the local community, suggests that visual disability may contribute to nursing home placement.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Risk factors, ranked →
Study details
- Effect size0.5%
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 40/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, studied in people and randomized / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record and multicenter collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 23 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 40 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (The Medical journal of Australia) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 0 / 12 | No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Strength of evidence | 1 / 5 | Rated “low” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 1 / 5 | 1997 — older than 20 years, still counted |
| Sample size | 0 / 4 | Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Effect reported | 2 / 3 | Effect reported as a number, without an interval or test |
| Studied in people | 0 / 3 | Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Randomized / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomization or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Times cited | — / 7 | No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score |
| Citations per year | — / 5 | No citation count or no year — left out of this score |
| Impact for its field and year | — / 6 | No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score |
| Cited by studies here | — / 6 | Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score |
| Still being cited | — / 4 | No yearly citation counts — left out of this score |
| Senior author's track record | — / 4 | Senior author's record not available — left out of this score |
| Institution's track record | — / 3 | No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Multicenter collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 9033561) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 23 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 23 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 40 out of 100. |
| Total | 40 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.
Related
Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.
Related studies in Risk factors
Also tagged “assisted-living”
199 studies in the library carry the topic tag “assisted-living”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 199 tagged studies.