0
We're unable to sign you in at this time. Please try again in a few minutes.
Retry
We were able to sign you in, but your subscription(s) could not be found. Please try again in a few minutes.
Retry
There may be a problem with your account. Please contact the AMA Service Center to resolve this issue.
Contact the AMA Service Center:
Telephone: 1 (800) 262-2350 or 1 (312) 670-7827  *   Email: subscriptions@jamanetwork.com
Error Message ......
In This Issue of JAMA Ophthalmology |

Highlights FREE

JAMA Ophthalmol. 2016;134(7):725. doi:10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2015.3244.
Text Size: A A A
Published online

RESEARCH

King and Rotchford investigate the validity of the monocular trial in patients commencing topical glaucoma treatment at different time points in a prospective cohort study of untreated patients with open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension. Of 30 individuals, the unadjusted intraocular pressure (IOP)–lowering effect overestimated the true therapeutic effect by a mean (SD) of 2.5 (4.8), 3.1 (3.8), and 4.9 (4.4) mm Hg at 8 am, 11 am, and 4 pm, respectively, and the mean adjusted IOP-lowering effect was almost identical to the true therapeutic effect at each of the 3 time points. The correlation between the unadjusted effect of treatment and the true therapeutic effect was 0.55, and the effect when adjusted by the monocular trial was 0.72. This study supports the monocular trial of therapy as an effective accurate predictor of response of an untreated eye to monotherapy with a prostaglandin analogue at all daytime time points measured.

To investigate a potential relationship between subconcussive head impacts and near point of convergence (NPC) ocular-motor function for delineating traumatic brain injury, Kawata and coauthors investigate repetitive subconcussive head impacts during preseason football practice within a prospective, observational study of 29 college football players. An accelerometer-embedded mouthguard measured head impact kinematics. The trajectory and cumulative burden of subconcussive impacts on NPC differed by group. Only in the higher-impact group was there a linear increase in NPC over time that plateaued and resolved by postseason follow-up. No group differences were observed postseason follow-up. Although asymptomatic, these data suggest that repetitive subconcussive head impacts were associated with changes in NPC.

In a population-based cross-sectional study of 10 US Census tracts in the city of Monterey Park, California, conducted by Varma and colleagues, the prevalence of presenting visual impairment (VI) was 3.0% among 4582 Chinese American adults 50 years and older, with 60.0% of this prevalence being attributed to uncorrected refractive error. The overall age-adjusted prevalence for VI was 1.2% and for blindness was 0.07%. The prevalence of blindness was lower than that noted in other US or non-US studies and myopic retinopathy was a frequent cause of VI and blindness in Chinese Americans that has not been commonly observed in other racial/ethnic groups.

Investigators from California and Chicago determine the demographic and geographic variations in vision impairment (VI) and blindness in adults in the US population in 2015 and estimate the projected prevalence through 2050. In 2015, a total of 1.02 million people were blind, and approximately 3.22 million people had VI, whereas up to 8.2 million people had VI due to uncorrected refractive error. Varma and coauthors found that by 2050, the numbers of these conditions are projected to double to approximately 2.01 million people with blindness, 6.95 million people with VI, and 16.4 million with VI due to uncorrected refractive error. The highest numbers of these conditions in 2015 were among non-Hispanic white individuals (2.28 million), women (1.84 million), and older adults (1.61 million), and these groups will remain the most affected through 2050. However, African American individuals experience the highest prevalence of VI and blindness.

Continuing Medical Education and Journal Club

Figures

Tables

References

Correspondence

CME
Also Meets CME requirements for:
Browse CME for all U.S. States
Accreditation Information
The American Medical Association is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education to provide continuing medical education for physicians. The AMA designates this journal-based CME activity for a maximum of 1 AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM per course. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity. Physicians who complete the CME course and score at least 80% correct on the quiz are eligible for AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM.
Note: You must get at least of the answers correct to pass this quiz.
Please click the checkbox indicating that you have read the full article in order to submit your answers.
Your answers have been saved for later.
You have not filled in all the answers to complete this quiz
The following questions were not answered:
Sorry, you have unsuccessfully completed this CME quiz with a score of
The following questions were not answered correctly:
Commitment to Change (optional):
Indicate what change(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Your quiz results:
The filled radio buttons indicate your responses. The preferred responses are highlighted
For CME Course: A Proposed Model for Initial Assessment and Management of Acute Heart Failure Syndromes
Indicate what changes(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.

Multimedia

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

341 Views
0 Citations
×

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.

Jobs