ABSTRACT
Objectives:
Axial length (AL) is an important contributor to refraction, and growth curves are gaining importance in the prediction of myopia. This study aimed to profile the distribution of ocular biometry parameters and to identify correlates of spherical equivalent refraction (SE) among school children in South India.
Materials and Methods:
The School Children Ocular Biometry and Refractive Error study was conducted as part of a school screening program in southern India. The enrolled children underwent tests that included vison check, refraction, binocular vision assessment, and biometry measurements.
Results:
The study included 1382 children whose mean (standard deviation [SD]) age was 10.18 (2.88) years (range: 5-16 years). The sample was divided into 4 groups (grades 1-2, grades 3-5, grades 6-9, and grade 10) based on significant differences in right AL (p<0.001). The mean (SD) AL (range: 20.33-27.27 mm) among the four groups was 22.50 (0.64) mm, 22.88 (0.69) mm, 23.30 (0.82) mm, and 23.58 (0.87) mm, respectively. The mean SE (range: +1.86 to -6.56 D) was 0.08 (0.65 D) in class 1 and decreased with increasing grade to -0.39 (1.20 D) in grade 10. There was a significant difference in all biometry parameters between boys and girls (p<0.001). Age, AL, and mean corneal curvature were the main predictors of SE.
Conclusion:
This study provides a profile of ocular biometry parameters among school children in South India for comparison against profiles from other regions across the country. The study data will form a reference for future studies assessing myopia in this ethnicity.
Keywords:
Myopia, ocular biometry, school children
Introduction
Myopia is increasing in prevalence globally and is predicted to affect half the world’s population by 2050.1 Trends in myopia prevalence vary among different ethnicities and regions of the world, with East Asians being more susceptible.1,2,3,4,6,7
In India, the prevalence of myopia among school children has shown a steady increase in the past decade from 4-8% to 14-21%.8,9,10,11,12 Accelerated eye growth is one of the key factors in the onset and progression of myopia. Hence, it is important to study the distribution of ocular biometry parameters among children to understand and predict myopia.13,14 It is also important to have baseline ocular biometry data for individual ethnicity and race to understand the regional prevalence and patterns of myopia and to be able to correlate and compare with other regions and ethnicities.
There are large data sets on refraction and biometry measures available from various studies among children of various ethnicities.5,6,7,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22 In India, although ocular biometry data are available for adults, they are scarce for children.23,24,25 This may be related to limitations in measurement techniques, as previously biometry measurements were largely obtained through ultrasound contact biometry. With the advent of non-contact biometry, it is now possible to assess ocular biometry parameters even in younger children.
Therefore, the aim of the School Children Ocular Biometry and Refractive Error study was to examine the distribution of ocular biometry parameters, identify correlates of spherical equivalent refraction, and create a database for ocular biometry measures among children aged 5 to 15 in South India.
Materials and Methods
Results
In total, there were 1382 children included in the study, out of which 700 children were boys. The mean age of the children was 10.2 (2.9) years (range: 5-15). In the sample, based on the definition of refractive status described, 877 children were emmetropic (63.5%), 390 children had astigmatism (28.2%), and 229 children (16.6%) had myopia. Of the children with myopia (≤-0.75 D), 188 children had -0.75 D or less in both meridians whereas 41 children had -0.75 D or less in one of the meridians. Only 3 children (0.2%) had a hyperopic error greater than 2 D. Mean age, spherical equivalent, and ocular biometry parameters from grade 1 to grade 10 are summarized in Table 1.
There was a statistically significant difference across the grades for all ocular biometry measures (one-way ANOVA, p<0.001). The sample was then divided into four groups based on post-hoc analysis using Bonferroni correction with a conservative p value. These four groups represent grades 1-2 (mean age: 6.20 [0.75] years), grades 3-5 (mean age: 9 [1.04] years), grades 6-9 (mean age: 12.17 [1.30] years), and grade 10 (mean age: 14.71 [0.50] years).
Discussion
The prevalence of myopia among Indian children has steadily increased in the past two decades. The present study reports a 16.6% prevalence, which is consistent with the recent Indian studies.11,12 This is the first study to analyze the distribution of ocular biometry components and their correlation with refractive error distribution among children in India. We observed a significant increase in axial length and anterior chamber depth and a decrease in lens thickness and corneal curvature with increasing age among Indian children, consistent with previous studies.5,6,7,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20 A comparison of the findings of the present study with those of previous studies is shown in Table 3.
In recent years, growth percentile curves of axial length and refraction have gained importance for predicting the development of high myopia.20,34 Given the differences in the prevalence of myopia among different ethnicities, it is important to develop region-specific growth percentiles to better predict ocular development. In this sense, the present study will be a reference point to develop similar percentile curves across various regions of India. The present study data when combined with other regional data can be a valuable tool for clinicians in myopia management.
Study Limitations
The strength of this study is that there are no prior normative data available for Indian children in this age group, and the results of the study give an overall pattern of ocular biometry distribution among children in India. The study results will form a baseline reference for future studies on refractive errors and their associated risk factors, especially myopia among school-aged children, which is now being explored in a longitudinal study by the same study group. Further studies are required across different regions of the country to establish age-based norms for ocular biometry.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the present study is a valuable contribution to the literature in terms of profiling and establishing a database of ocular biometry parameters among school children in India. The findings of this study could be applied in future studies aimed at understanding risk factors for myopia among Indian children.
References
1Holden BA, Fricke TR, Wilson DA, Jong M, Naidoo KS, Sankaridurg P, Wong TY, Naduvilath TJ, Resnikoff S. Global Prevalence of Myopia and High Myopia and Temporal Trends from 2000 through 2050. Ophthalmology. 2016;123:1036-1042.
2Pan CW, Ramamurthy D, Saw SM. Worldwide prevalence and risk factors for myopia. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 2012;32:3-16.
3Foster PJ, Jiang Y. Epidemiology of myopia. Eye (Lond). 2014;28:202-208.
4Rudnicka AR, Kapetanakis VV, Wathern AK, Logan NS, Gilmartin B, Whincup PH, Cook DG, Owen CG. Global variations and time trends in the prevalence of childhood myopia, a systematic review and quantitative meta-analysis: implications for aetiology and early prevention. Br J Ophthalmol. 2016;100:882-890.
5Ip JM, Huynh SC, Robaei D, Kifley A, Rose KA, Morgan IG, Wang JJ, Mitchell P. Ethnic differences in refraction and ocular biometry in a population-based sample of 11-15-year-old Australian children. Eye (Lond). 2008;22:649-656.
6Twelker JD, Mitchell GL, Messer DH, Bhakta R, Jones LA, Mutti DO, Cotter SA, Klenstein RN, Manny RE, Zadnik K; CLEERE Study Group. Children’s Ocular Components and Age, Gender, and Ethnicity. Optom Vis Sci. 2009;86:918-35.
7Rudnicka AR, Owen CG, Nightingale CM, Cook DG, Whincup PH. Ethnic differences in the prevalence of myopia and ocular biometry in 10- and 11-year-old children: the Child Heart and Health Study in England (CHASE). Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2010;51:6270-6276.
8Dandona R, Dandona L, Srinivas M, Sahare P, Narsaiah S, Muñoz SR, Pokharel GP, Ellwein LB. Refractive error in children in a rural population in India. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2002;43:615-622.
9Kalikivayi V, Naduvilath TJ, Bansal AK, Dandona L. Visual impairment in school children in southern India. Indian J Ophthalmol. 1997;45:129-134. Erratum in: Indian J Ophthalmol. 1997;45:168.
10Murthy GV, Gupta SK, Ellwein LB, Muñoz SR, Pokharel GP, Sanga L, Bachani D. Refractive error in children in an urban population in New Delhi. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2002;43:623-631.
11Saxena R, Vashist P, Tandon R, Pandey RM, Bhardawaj A, Menon V, Mani K. Prevalence of myopia and its risk factors in urban school children in Delhi: the North India Myopia Study (NIM Study). PLoS One. 2015;10:e0117349.
12Singh NK, James RM, Yadav A, Kumar R, Asthana S, Labani S. Prevalence of Myopia and Associated Risk Factors in Schoolchildren in North India. Optom Vis Sci. 2019;96:200-205.
13Flitcroft DI. Emmetropisation and the aetiology of refractive errors. Eye (Lond). 2014;28:169-179.
14Mutti DO, Hayes JR, Mitchell GL, Jones LA, Moeschberger ML, Cotter SA, Kleinstein RN, Manny RE, Twelker JD, Zadnik K; CLEERE Study Group. Refractive error, axial length, and relative peripheral refractive error before and after the onset of myopia. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2007;48:2510-2519.
15Saw SM, Carkeet A, Chia KS, Stone RA, Tan DT. Component dependent risk factors for ocular parameters in Singapore Chinese children. Ophthalmology. 2002;109:2065-2071.
16Ojaimi E, Rose KA, Morgan IG, Smith W, Martin FJ, Kifley A, Robaei D, Mitchell P. Distribution of ocular biometric parameters and refraction in a population-based study of Australian children. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2005;46:2748-2754.
17Li SM, Li SY, Kang MT, Zhou YH, Li H, Liu LR, Yang XY, Wang YP, Yang Z, Zhan SY, Gopinath B, Mitchell P, Atchison DA, Wang N. Distribution of ocular biometry in 7- and 14-year-old Chinese children. Optom Vis Sci. 2015;92:566-572.
18Hashemi H, Jafarzadehpur E, Ghaderi S, Yekta A, Ostadimoghaddam H, Norouzirad R, Khabazkhoob M. Ocular components during the ages of ocular development. Acta Ophthalmol. 2015;93:e74-e81.
19Lira RP, Arieta CE, Passos TH, Maziero D, Astur GL, do Espírito Santo ÍF, Bertolani AC, Pozzi LF, de Castro RS, Ferraz ÁA. Distribution of Ocular Component Measures and Refraction in Brazilian School Children. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 2017;24:29-35.
20Tideman JWL, Polling JR, Vingerling JR, Jaddoe VWV, Williams C, Guggenheim JA, Klaver CCW. Axial length growth and the risk of developing myopia in European children. Acta Ophthalmol. 2018;96:301-309.
21Harrington SC, O’Dwyer V. Ocular biometry, refraction and time spent outdoors during daylight in Irish schoolchildren. Clin Exp Optom. 2020;103:167-176. Erratum in: Clin Exp Optom. 2020;103:398.
22Yotsukura E, Torii H, Inokuchi M, Tokumura M, Uchino M, Nakamura K, Hyodo M, Mori K, Jiang X, Ikeda SI, Kondo S, Negishi K, Kurihara T, Tsubota K. Current Prevalence of Myopia and Association of Myopia With Environmental Factors Among Schoolchildren in Japan. JAMA Ophthalmol. 2019;137:1233-1239.
23Nangia V, Jonas JB, Sinha A, Matin A, Kulkarni M, Panda-Jonas S. Ocular axial length and its associations in an adult population of central rural India: the Central India Eye and Medical Study. Ophthalmology. 2010;117:1360-1366.
24Pan CW, Wong TY, Chang L, Lin XY, Lavanya R, Zheng YF, Kok YO, Wu RY, Aung T, Saw SM. Ocular biometry in an urban Indian population: the Singapore Indian Eye Study (SINDI). Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2011;52:6636-6642.
25Nangia V, Jonas JB, Matin A, Kulkarni M, Sinha A, Gupta R. Body height and ocular dimensions in the adult population in rural Central India. The Central India Eye and Medical Study. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2010;248:1657-1666.
26Raja M, Ramamurthy D, Srinivasan K, Varadharajan LS. Development of Pocket Vision Screener and its effectiveness at screening visual acuity deficits. Indian J Ophthalmol. 2014;62:1152-1155.
27Hussaindeen JR, Rakshit A, Singh NK, Swaminathan M, George R, Kapur S, Scheiman M, Ramani KK. The minimum test battery to screen for binocular vision anomalies: report 3 of the BAND study. Clin Exp Optom. 2018;101:281-287.
28Flitcroft DI, He M, Jonas JB, Jong M, Naidoo K, Ohno-Matsui K, Rahi J, Resnikoff S, Vitale S, Yannuzzi L. IMI - Defining and Classifying Myopia: A Proposed Set of Standards for Clinical and Epidemiologic Studies. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2019;60:M20-M30.
29Castagno VD, Fassa AG, Carret ML, Vilela MA, Meucci RD. Hyperopia: a meta-analysis of prevalence and a review of associated factors among school-aged children. BMC Ophthalmol. 2014;14:163.
30Choong YF, Chen AH, Goh PP. A comparison of autorefraction and subjective refraction with and without cycloplegia in primary school children. Am J Ophthalmol. 2006;142:68-74.
31Kuo YC, Wang JH, Chiu CJ. Comparison of open-field autorefraction, closed-field autorefraction, and retinoscopy for refractive measurements of children and adolescents in Taiwan. J Formos Med Assoc. 2020;119:1251-1258.
32Huang J, Savini G, Hoffer KJ, Chen H, Lu W, Hu Q, Bao F, Wang Q. Repeatability and interobserver reproducibility of a new optical biometer based on swept-source optical coherence tomography and comparison with IOLMaster. Br J Ophthalmol. 2017;101:493-498.
33Shammas HJ, Ortiz S, Shammas MC, Kim SH, Chong C. Biometry measurements using a new large-coherence-length swept-source optical coherence tomographer. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2016;42:50-61.
34Sanz Diez P, Yang LH, Lu MX, Wahl S, Ohlendorf A. Growth curves of myopia-related parameters to clinically monitor the refractive development in Chinese schoolchildren. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2019;257:1045-1053.
35Hussaindeen JR, Mariam EG, Arunachalam S, Bhavatharini R, Gopalakrishnan A, Narayanan A, Agarkar S, Sivaraman V. Comparison of axial length using a new swept-source optical coherence tomography-based biometer - ARGOS with partial coherence interferometry- based biometer -IOLMaster among school children. PLoS One. 2018;13:e0209356.
36Pan CW, Dirani M, Cheng CY, Wong TY, Saw SM. The age-specific prevalence of myopia in Asia: a meta-analysis. Optom Vis Sci. 2015;92:258-266.