Aim: To determine the trend in the prevalence of hyperopia in Tehran, Iran.
Methods: Using a stratified random cluster sample of the population of Tehran, all participants 5 years of age and older were studied with cycloplegic autorefraction 30 min after instilling two drops of cyclopentolate 1%. Prevalence rates of cycloplegic hyperopia for different cut points were determined, stratified by age.
Results: The prevalence rates of hyperopia as a spherical equivalent equal to or more than +0.5, +1.0, +2.0 and +3.0 D were 56.6%, 28.1%, 6.3% and 2.2%, respectively. With all these definitions, the prevalence of cycloplegic hyperopia reached a minimum in the 25–35-year age group, and then significantly increased until the age of 70. Multivariable regression analysis with variables such as age, gender, diabetes and cataract showed that only age was significantly correlated with hyperopia.
Conclusions: Although an age-cohort effect cannot be ruled out, these results provide the first population-based evidence of increasing hyperopia with age using cycloplegic refraction. The results obtained suggest that the contribution of decreasing accommodation to observed hyperopic shifts in distance refraction in longitudinal studies is small, raising the question of the underlying causes of the hyperopic shift in refraction with age.
Statistics from Altmetric.com
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
Funding This project is funded in part by the Noor Ophthalmology, Research Center and a grant from the Iranian National Research Center for Medical Sciences. IGM was supported by a grant from the Australian Research Council to the ARC Centre of Excellence in Vision Science (COE561903).
Competing interests None.
Ethics approval Ethics approval was provided by the Ethics Committee of the Noor Ophthalmology Research Center and the Ethics Committee of the National Research Center for Medical Sciences.
Patient consent Obtained.
Provenance and Peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.