Trends in the prevalence of common ocular conditions and comparison of ophthalmic outpatient utilisation related to these conditions in children with and without various types of disabilities: analysis of nationwide population-based data from Taiwan, 2014-2019.

OBJECTIVE: The study objectives were to investigate trends in the prevalence of common ocular conditions among children with and without disabilities; to compare the prevalence of these conditions in children with various disabilities; and to compare ophthalmic outpatient utilisation related to these ocular conditions in children with and without disabilities. DESIGN: Repeated cross-sectional nationwide population-based study. SETTING: Nationwide analysis in Taiwan based on National Health Insurance (NHI) claims data and the National Disability Registry, from 2014 to 2019. PARTICIPANTS: All children (aged under 18 years) with a disability in any given year between 2014 and 2019 were included in our analysis. All children with a disability (experimental group) were matched 1:1 with a child of the same age without a disability (control group). Data regarding the children's disability type and status and ocular conditions were obtained from the National Disability Registry and NHI database of Taiwan. OUTCOME MEASURES: (1) The prevalence of myopia, strabismus, astigmatism, amblyopia and hyperopia over time; (2) the prevalence of myopia, strabismus, astigmatism, amblyopia and hyperopia in children with various disabilities; and (3) the association between disability and the use of outpatient vision care. All outcome measures were assessed using data from 2014 to 2019. RESULTS: Among children with disability, the prevalence of myopia increased from 15.97% in 2014 to 18.07% in 2019. The prevalence of strabismus (2.06-3.90%), astigmatism (8.25-9.24%), amblyopia (4.13-4.95%) and hyperopia (3.36-4.58%) also increased over the study period in children with disabilities. The prevalence of strabismus, astigmatism, amblyopia and hyperopia was significantly higher in children with disabilities than in those without disabilities in all years. For example, in 2019, the prevalence values for strabismus, astigmatism, amblyopia and hyperopia were 3.90%, 9.24%, 4.95% and 4.58%, respectively, among children with disabilities, and 0.67%, 5.84%, 1.33% and 1.70%, respectively, for those without disabilities. The prevalence of these conditions varied considerably across disability types. For example, in 2019, the prevalence of strabismus was highest in children with visual disabilities (10.66%; p<0.001); these children also exhibited a high prevalence of amblyopia (24.34%; p<0.001). The prevalence of myopia was high in children with autism (24.77%), but the prevalence of other ocular conditions was not elevated in this group. Regression results indicated that for myopia, children with disability had 0.48 fewer outpatient clinic visits than those without disability (p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of common ocular conditions and the corresponding vision care required vary across types of disabilities among children. Healthcare policies must account for children at high risk of various ocular conditions, including those with less common disabilities.