rss
Br J Ophthalmol 2009;93:866-870 doi:10.1136/bjo.2008.151720
  • Global issues

Trachoma in the Pacific Islands: evidence from Trachoma Rapid Assessment

  1. A A Mathew1,
  2. J E Keeffe1,2,
  3. R T Le Mesurier1,
  4. H R Taylor3
  1. 1
    Centre for Eye Research Australia, University of Melbourne, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, Melbourne, Australia
  2. 2
    Vision CRC, Sydney, Australia
  3. 3
    Melbourne School of Population Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
  1. Dr A A Mathew, Centre for Eye Research Australia, University of Melbourne, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, 32 Gisborne Street, East Melbourne, VIC 3002, Australia; mathewa{at}unimelb.edu.au
  • Accepted 13 December 2008
  • Published Online First 27 January 2009

Abstract

Aims: To establish the presence or absence of trachoma in the Pacific Island region.

Methods: Trachoma Rapid Assessment methodology was used in Kiribati, Nauru, Vanuatu, Solomon Islands and Fiji. Advised by key informants, high-risk communities were chosen from each country. All available children aged 1–9 years and adults ≥40 years were examined.

Results: A total of 903 adults ≥40 years and 3102 children aged 1–9 years were screened at 67 sites. Rates of active trachoma in children were >15% in all sites in Kiribati and >20% in all sites in Nauru. However, there was a high variability of rates of active trachoma in survey sites in Vanuatu, Solomon Islands and Fiji with rates ranging from 0% to 43% (average 23.3%), 6.0% to 51.9% (average 30.5%) and 0% to 48.8% (average 22.1%) respectively. Average rates of scarring trachoma in adults were 61.9% in Kiribati, 12.5% in Nauru, 38.2% in Vanuatu, 67.0% in the Solomon Islands and 18.8% in Fiji. Rates of trichiasis and trichiasis surgeries suggest the possibility of blinding trachoma in the region.

Conclusion: The findings indicate that trachoma is present in all the Pacific Island countries screened. Further prevalence studies are required, and trachoma control measures should be considered.

Footnotes

  • Competing interests: None.

  • Funding: The World Health Organization and the Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital.

  • Ethics approval: Ethics approval was provided by the Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital Human Research and Ethics Committee.

This Article

  1. Abstract
  2. Full text
  3. PDF
  4. All versions of this article:
    1. bjo.2008.151720v1
    2. 93/7/866 most recent

Responses

  1. Submit a response
  2. No responses published

Register for free content

The full back archive is now available for all BMJ Journals. Institutional subscribers may access the entire archive as part of their subscription. Personal subscribers will also have access to all content when logged in. Non-subscribers who register have free access to all articles published before 2006 right back to volume 1 issue 1. Register here to access the free archive of all BMJ Journals.

Don't forget to sign up for content alerts so you keep up to date with all the articles as they are published.