4.1 Article

Prevalence of Pseudoexfoliation Syndrome and Associated Factors in South Koreans: The Korean National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey

期刊

OPHTHALMIC EPIDEMIOLOGY
卷 23, 期 5, 页码 298-302

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC
DOI: 10.3109/09286586.2015.1131992

关键词

Cataract; glaucoma; prevalence; pseudoexfoliation syndrome; South Korean

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: To investigate the prevalence of pseudoexfoliation syndrome (PXS) and factors associated with PXS in South Koreans by analyzing data from the Korean National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (KNHANES). Methods: Using the KNHANES database of 2009-2012, 13,223 participants aged 50 years or older were included. Participants underwent standardized interviews and systemic and ocular examinations. Systemic factors analyzed included age, sex, daily length of sun exposure, presence of Raynaud phenomenon or migraine, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, body mass index, serum lipid profile, duration and frequency of smoking, and alcohol consumption. Evaluated ocular factors were refractive error, presence of cataract and glaucoma, intraocular pressure, and peripheral anterior chamber depth. Logistic regression analysis was performed to identify factors associated with the presence of PXS. Results: PXS was found in 16 participants (0.12%). When compared with the non-PXS group, eyes with PXS showed a higher prevalence of cataract (p = 0.020). In logistic regression analysis, age (odds ratio, OR, 1.04, 95% confidence interval, CI, 0.99-1.09; p = 0.016) and the presence of cataract (OR 8.17, 95% CI 1.06-62.84; p = 0.044) were associated with the presence of PXS. Sun exposure for 5 hours/day was marginally associated with the presence of PXS (OR 2.76, 95% CI 0.96-7.95; p = 0.060). Conclusion: The prevalence of PXS per 1000 persons was 1.10 in South Koreans aged 50 years. Participants with PXS had a higher prevalence of cataract, were older, and were more likely to be exposed to the sun for 5 hours/day than participants without PXS.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据