Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2025 Jun 26;14(13):4546.
doi: 10.3390/jcm14134546.

Assessment of the Quality of Life in Children and Adolescents with Myopia from the City of Varna

Affiliations

Assessment of the Quality of Life in Children and Adolescents with Myopia from the City of Varna

Mariya Stoeva et al. J Clin Med. .

Abstract

Background: The World Health Organization defines myopia as a global epidemic. Its growing prevalence and the increasingly early age onset all raise a major concern for public health due to the elevated risk of loss and deterioration of visual function as a result of myopia-related ocular pathological complications. However, it remains unclear whether the vision-related quality of life of patients with myopia is the same as in healthy individuals. The aim of the present study is to assess the quality of life in children and adolescents with myopia between the ages of 8 and 16 years, who underwent observation at USBOBAL-Varna. Methods: This study prospectively included 190 patients with myopia between -1.00 and -5.50 D, corrected with different optical aids. After a thorough physical ocular examination and inquiry into the best visual acuity with and without distance correction, specially designed questionnaires were completed by the patients and their parents/guardians for the purpose of the study. The data from the questionnaires was statistically processed. The mean age of the patients in the study was 11.65 years, 101 were female and 89 were male. Of these, 83 wore monofocal glasses, 50 were monofocal and 47 were multifocal contact lenses, and 10 wore ortho-K lenses. Results: No significant difference in best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) was found among the three types of optical correction (p-value > 0.05). Cronbach's alpha of the questionnaire for all 10 factors was higher than 0.6, indicating acceptable internal consistency. Significantly higher scores were reported for overall, near, and distance vision, symptoms, appearance, attitude, activities and hobbies, handling, and perception for soft contact lens wearers than for spectacle wearers (p-value < 0.05). Ortho-K wearers performed better than spectacle wearers in all aspects except for pronounced symptoms (p = 0.74). No significant difference was found between ortho-K wearers and soft contact lens wearers for any factor (p > 0.05). Conclusions: Patients wearing spectacles and with myopia above -5.00 D had the highest anxiety scores and lower quality of life among all myopic participants. The research on the quality of life in children with myopia with different refractive errors and optical correction devices is crucial for improving corrective devices and meeting the needs of patients.

Keywords: multifocal contact lenses; myopia; myopia control; quality of life; socially significant.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
SCARED scores (median) of the participants in this study, distributed by corrective device. * indicates significant differences between groups.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Distribution of patients based on the corrective device and the score of the anxiety questions panel (median).
Figure 3
Figure 3
Distribution of patients in terms of lowest quality of life and means of correction in percentages.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Distribution of patients according to the lowest quality of life and refractive error in percentage.

Similar articles

References

    1. Sankaridurg P., Tahhan N., Kandel H., Naduvilath T., Zou H., Frick K.D., Marmamula S., Friedman D.S., Lamoureux E., Keeffe J., et al. IMI impact of myopia. Investig. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2021;62:2. doi: 10.1167/iovs.62.5.2. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. World Health Organization (WHO) World Report on Vision. 2019. [(accessed on 1 April 2025)]. Available online: https://iris.who.int/bitstream/handle/10665/328717/9789241516570-eng.pdf....
    1. The Impact of Myopia and High Myopia: A Report of the Joint World Health Organization–Brien Holden Vision Institute, Global Scientific Meeting on Myopia. University of New South Wales; Sydney, Australia: 2015. [(accessed on 5 March 2025)]. World Health Organization (WHO) Available online: https://myopiainstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Myopia_report_020....
    1. Holden B.A., Fricke T.R., Wilson D.A., Jong M., Naidoo K.S., Sankaridurg P., Wong T.Y., Naduvilath T., Resnikoff S. Global prevalence of myopia and high myopia and temporal trends from 2000 through 2050. Ophthalmology. 2016;123:1036–1042. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2016.01.006. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Cooper J., Tkatchenko A.V. A review of current concepts of the etiology and treatment of myopia. Eye Contact Lens. 2018;44:231–247. doi: 10.1097/ICL.0000000000000499. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources