Using prevalence-based and conservative methodology, the study builds on existing, authoritative sources of Canadian data and research. It uses known costs wherever possible, accurately reflecting real Canadian expenditures and government policies.
The findings are extensive, and they are without question the most definitive data now available. This document provides a summary of the full report, The Cost of Vision Loss in Canada, which was released concurrently in In addition, this summary provides supplementary data, research and analysis to broaden and provide context for the understanding of the impact of vision loss in Canada.
Read the study. In April of , 5. Of the 24, people who attended in April of , almost half People with a severe seeing limitation were just as likely to attend school as those with a mild limitation. Approximately four in ten people with seeing difficulties had an educational attainment greater than a high school diploma. In , According to the Participation and Activity Limitation Survey findings, people with seeing limitations experienced various effects on their education.
For example, over one-third Other common effects included the interruption of studies for a long period of time In , over one-third Fewer than one in ten 7. Chart 2 Labour force status of people aged 15 to 64 with a seeing limitation, In , over half Older individuals were more likely to state that they were limited at work than were younger people.
For example, people with a seeing condition aged 35 to 44 were twice as likely as those aged 15 to 24 to report being limited at work Severity of the limitation did not make a significant difference in the modifications required, and for the majority of people these requirements were met.
Although people with seeing limitations are usually provided with the necessary workplace or job modifications, they experience challenges in advancing or changing jobs.
Of those who reported being employed, one-half Common reasons for experiencing difficulty included being limited in the number of hours that they could work The Genetic Non-Discrimination Act is one example of such a protection for those with inherited diseases.
It currently prohibits Canadian companies and insurers from requiring genetic tests or denying services based on genetic information. This protects those with genetic conditions from having their genetic histories held against them when seeking employment or services, or when signing contracts with companies.
Knowing they are protected in this way also gives many Canadians peace of mind when seeking genetic testing; for many, this is an essential step towards accessing new treatments and being included in clinical trials.
The Act was passed into law, but it is being appealed by the Quebec government on the basis of its constitutionality. Ensuring that the Genetic Non-Discrimination Act remains law is a key step towards securing privacy and protection for Canadians with inherited vision loss. In and beyond, similar legal safeguards should be fought for to protect the Canadian vision loss community against systematic discrimination.
Though vision loss can lead to isolation, it is also the case that it regularly impacts the lives of those connected to it indirectly, particularly the family members, loved ones, and other caregivers who provide support to those living with vision loss. In this sense vision loss is not only a personal or subjective experience, but also a shared one that moves across a network of individuals, families, and communities.
In many cases, family members bear the largest burden of support. In the case of diseases with high treatment demands such as wet age-related macular degeneration wet AMD and diabetic macular edema DME , this often means providing regular transport to and from appointments with eye specialists and blocking off time for waiting rooms—sometimes an entire day.
In cases of severe vision loss, families and other caregivers sometimes function as a second set of eyes, a near-constant presence to ensure the safety and health of those they love. This is especially true of the caregivers supporting those with special needs: children with vision loss, seniors, individuals with comorbidities, and others.
The needs of any child are extensive, but a parent of a child with a congenital disease—Leber congenital amaurosis LCA , for example, which leads to severe visual impairment in infancy—faces a set of particularly daunting challenges, ones that often require dramatic personal and career changes to overcome them.
Stress, fatigue, finances, and mental health are fundamental concerns here, and it is important that we find new and better ways to mitigate these and other strains placed on the individuals who provide care.
This is important in the face of the growing need for caregivers and the growing demands placed on them. Our population of caregivers will grow in parallel. And as work becomes increasingly precarious and social supports and pensions continue to disappear, there is a pronounced danger that caregivers, especially primary ones, will become overwhelmed.
Envisioning and implementing support mechanisms for our support-providers has never been more important. Canadian caregivers are exemplary in many ways, but one thing they show in particular is the value of collective and community-driven action.
Support groups and community networks are integral to the work of caregiving, providing avenues for knowledge sharing, collaboration, and much more. Interestingly, it is exactly this kind of collaboration that will be necessary going forward—not only in the more personal instances of caregiving, but in the broader spheres of policy, law, governance, and health technology.
Whether it be accessibility programs, advancements in research, innovative health policies, or new educational initiatives, collaboration and partnerships from a variety of groups will be essential. This includes government, industry, academia, health professionals, patients, patient groups, and many more.
Prevalence and determinants of visual impairment in Canada: cross-sectional data from the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging. Thank you for visiting nature. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer. In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript. The purpose of this study was to ascertain the prevalence and primary causes of visual impairment in a representative Canadian population.
We reviewed a representative sample of patients who attended ophthalmologists' offices in a medium-sized Canadian city between and in order to estimate the prevalence of visual impairment. Demographic data, visual diagnoses, best-corrected visual acuities BCVA , and visual field information were recorded. Population data were obtained from the Canadian census.
The prevalence of low vision and blindness in our population was Age-related macular degeneration and other retinal diseases were the next most common causes of vision loss. Diabetic retinopathy and glaucoma were less frequently encountered as causes of visual impairment. The overall prevalence of low vision and blindness in Canada are in keeping with data from large population-based studies from other developed nations.
Cataract, visual pathway disease, and macular degeneration are the leading causes of visual impairment. These results are important for enhancing our understanding of the scope of vision health in Canada and may direct future health planning and cost-utilization research. Blindness is an important health care issue that exacts both economic and social costs. However, individuals with blindness only represent a small fraction of those with visual impairment.
The ageing of Canada's population and workforce, coupled with the increased visual demands of our modern culture, will increase the impact of low vision and blindness on our society in the coming decades. Epidemiologic data about the causes and prevalence of low vision and blindness in Canada are weak.
Such studies would accurately define the present state of visual loss and blindness in Canada but are known to be expensive and time-consuming to carry-out.
The PALS survey found that 2. Thus, disease-specific prevalence figures are not available from any prior study in Canada. Accurate visual impairment prevalence data is essential to 1 understand the present state of vision health in Canada and 2 to help direct public policy and resources towards the principal vision problems in Canada. This paper provides an evaluation of the prevalence and causes of low vision and blindness in a mid-sized Canadian city — Prince George, British Columbia.
Age-standardization of this data to the Canadian population provides the first national estimate of the prevalence of low vision and blindness in Canada. It is the primary referral centre for tertiary medical care in Northern British Columbia.
Prince George is quite isolated and it would be unexpected for any resident to receive primary eye care outside of the community. Three ophthalmologists provide ophthalmic care for the region and all perform surgery.
There is similar access to general medical and surgical ophthalmic services in Prince George compared with the rest of BC. In order to determine the prevalence of blindness and low vision in Prince George, a sampling from all ophthalmic charts in the community was performed in August The three ophthalmologists participating in this study were the only physicians to practice ophthalmology in Prince George during the study period. Optometrists in British Columbia do not presently have access to therapeutic agents and, as such, we assumed that individuals with significant ocular pathology would be seen by one of the local ophthalmologists at least once during the study period.
A 5-year study period was chosen to coincide with the intercensus interval of the Canadian Census June 1, and June 1, Any patient seen by a Prince George ophthalmologist during this period was eligible for inclusion. The best-corrected visual acuity and field tests from the eye examination closest to, but not after, June were used for the primary analyses. Causes of visual loss and visual field interpretation for each patient were ascertained through chart review by an independent ophthalmologist who did not have patients in the study.
0コメント