4.6 Article

Direct costs of myopia in Singapore

Journal

EYE
Volume 23, Issue 5, Pages 1086-1089

Publisher

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/eye.2008.225

Keywords

myopia; cost of illness; Singapore; economics

Categories

Funding

  1. National Medical Research Council [NMRC/0975/2005]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Aims To estimate the direct costs of myopia in Singapore children. Methods A cross-sectional study of 377 Singaporean school children aged 12-17 years from one school in Singapore Cohort study of the Risk factors for Myopia (SCORM) was conducted. A combination of parent and self-administered questionnaires asked about the cost of each optometrist visit, spectacles, and contact lenses, transport costs, father's educational level, and total family income. Results A total of 377 subjects participated and cost data were available from 301 subjects. The mean annual direct cost of myopia was S$221.7 +/- 313.7 (CI, S$186.5-258.1) or US$147.8 +/- 209.1 (CI, US$124.3-172.1) and median annual direct cost of myopia was S$125.0 or US$83.3. The mean cost per pair of spectacles was S$123.2 +/- 61.2 (CI, S$116.6-129.8) or US$82.1 +/- 40.8 (CI, US$77.8-86.5). Sixty subjects (15.9%) wore contact lenses. The mean annual cost of contact lenses was S$567.1 +/- 565.7 (CI, S$422.2-712.0) or US$378.1 +/- 377.1 (CI, US$281.4-474.6). Subjects of families with higher total family income and those with fathers with secondary or higher education had higher annual direct expenditure (P = 0.03 and P = 0.001 respectively). Subjects from families with higher household incomes had higher frequency of change of spectacles (P = 0.02) and shorter time since the last change of spectacles (P = 0.03). Conclusions The mean annual direct cost of myopia for Singapore school children was S$221.68 (US$148) and the median, S$125.00 (US$83.33) per subject. Myopia is associated with significant financial burden in Singapore. Eye (2009) 23, 1086-1089; doi:10.1038/eye.2008.225; published online 1 August 2008

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available