Czech and Slovak Ophthalmology 24 Original article Prevalence of refractive errors in the Slovak population calculated using the Gullstrand schematic eye model Popov Ivajlo https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6368-0347 Valášková Jela https://orcid.org/0009-0002-4740-2587 Štefaničková Jana Krásnik Vladimír Tomčíková Dana https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9285-7065 30 8 2017 3 5

Purpose: Large part of the population suffers of some kind of refractive errors. It is supposed that their prevalence could change with the development of the society. The aim of this study is to determine the prevalence of refractive errors using calculations based on the Gullstrand schematic eye. Methods: We used Gullstrand schematic eye to calculate refraction retrospectively. Refraction was presented as needed glasses correction in vertex distance 12 mm. Necessary data was obtained with the optical biometer Lenstar LS900. Data which could not be obtained due to the device limitation were substituted by theoretical data from the Gullstrand schematic eye. Only analyses from the right eyes were presented. Data were interpreted using descriptive statistics, Pearson correlation and t-test. Statistical tests were conducted at significance level of 5 %. Results: In our sample were 1663 patients (665 males, 998 females) in age from 19 to 96 years. Average age was 70,8 ± 9,53 years. Average refraction of the eye was 2,73 ± 2,13D (males 2,49 ± 2,34, females 2,90 ± 2,76). Mean absolute error from emmetropia was 3,01 ± 1,58 (males 2,83 ± 2,95, female 3,25 ± 3,35). 89,06 % of the sample was hyperopic, 6,61 % was myopic and 4,33 % emmetropic. We did not find correlation between refraction and the age. Conclusion: Females were more hyperopic than males. We did not find any statistically significant hypermetopic shift of the refraction with the age. According to our estimation the calculations of refractive errors showed hypermetropic shift of more than +2D from reality. Our results could be used in future for comparing prevalence of refractive errors using same methods as we used.

 refractive errors refraction Gullstrand schematic eye population emmetropia References http://www.who.int/blindness/ Change%20the%20Definition%20 of%20Blindness.pdf Aine E: Refractive errors in a Finnish rural population. Acta Ophthalmol (Copenh), 1984, 62(6): 944–954. Attebo K, Ivers RQ, Mitchell P: Refractive errors in an older population: the Blue Mountains Eye Study. Ophthalmology, 1999, 106(6):1066–1072. Foster PJ, Broadway DC , Hayat S, Luben R, Dalzell N, Bingham S, Wareham NJ, Khaw KT : Refractive error, axial length and anterior chamber depth of the eye in British adults: the EPIC-Norfolk Eye Study. Br J Ophthalmol, 2010, 94(7): 827–830. Fotedar R, Wang JJ, Burlutsky G, Morgan IG, Rose K, Wong TY, Mitchell P: Distribution of axial length and ocular biometry measured using partial coherence laser interferometry (IOL Master) in an older white population. Ophthalmology, 2010, 117(3): 417– 423. Holden B, Sankaridurg P, Smith E, Aller T, Jong M, He M: Myopia, an under - rated global challenge to vision: where res M, Varma R: Refractive Error, Ocular Biometry, and Lens Opalescence in an Adult Population: The Los Angeles Latino Eye Study. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci, 2005, 46(12): 4450–4460. Hyams SW, Pokotilo E, Shkurko G: Prevalence of refractive errors in adults over 40: a survey of 8102 eyes. Br J Ophthalmol, 1977, 61(6): 428–432. Lavery JR, Gibson JM, Shaw DE, Rosenthal AR: Refraction and refractive errors in an elderly population. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt, 1988, 8(4): 394–396. Lin LL, Shih YF, Hsiao CK, Chen C J: Prevalence of myopia in Taiwanese schoolchildren: 1983 to 2000. Ann Acad Med Singapore, 2004, 33(1): 27–33. Olsen T , Arnarsson A, Sasaki H, Sasaki K, Jonasson F: On the ocular refractive components: the Reykjavik Eye Study. Acta Ophthalmol Scand, 2007, 85(4): 361–366. Pascolini D, Mariotti SP: Global estimates of visual impairment: 2010. Br J Ophthalmol, 2012, 96(5): 614–618. Resnikoff S, Pascolini D, Mariotti SP, Pokharel GP: Global magnitude of visual impairment caused by uncorrected refractive errors in 2004. Bull World Health Organ, 2008, 86(1): 63–70. Shufelt C , Fraser-Bell S, Ying-Lai M, T or- Slataper FJ: Age norms of refraction and vision. Arch Ophthalmol, 1950, 43(3): 466–481. Tsai D-C, Fang S-Y, Huang N, Hsu C-C, Chen S-Y, Chiu AW-H, Liu CJ-L: Myopia Development Among Young Schoolchildren: The Myopia Investigation Study in TaipeiIncident Myopia Among Schoolchildren in Taipei. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci, 2016, 57(15): 6852–6860. Vitale S, Sperduto RD , Ferris FL, 3rd: Increased prevalence of myopia in the United States between 1971-1972 and 1999-2004. Arch Ophthalmol, 2009, 127(12): 1632–1639. Wang Q, Klein BE, Klein R, Moss SE: Refractive status in the Beaver Dam Eye Study. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci, 1994, 35(13): 4344–4347. Wensor M, McCarty CA, Taylor HR: Prevalence and risk factors of myopia in Victoria, Australia. Arch Ophthalmol, 1999, 117(5): 658–663.