Perbedaan Tajam Penglihatan PACG Akut dan Kronis di RSUP Dr. M. Djamil Padang Tahun 2019
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.11594/ojkmi.v6i3.74Keywords:
visus, glaukoma sudut tertutup akut, glaukoma sudut tertutup kronisAbstract
Latar belakang: Jumlah penderita glaukoma terus meningkat di seluruh dunia, termasuk di Indonesia. Kejadian glaukoma berhubungan dengan kondisi kebutaan, yang mana glaukoma adalah penyebab kedua tertinggi dari kebutaan di Indonesia.
Metode: Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian analitik dengan rancangan penelitian cross sectional study comparative yang dilakukan terhadap pasien glaukoma sejumlah 44 orang pasien di RSUP Dr. M. Djamil Padang, dengan satu orang pasien diwakili oleh satu mata, dimana pasien baru pertama kali datang ke RSUP Dr. M. Djamil Padang. Pada penelitian ini pasien dikelompokkan menjadi PACG akut dan kronis, setelah itu dinilai perbedaan tajam penglihatan pada masing-masing kelompok. Analisis dilakukan dengan Independent Sample T-test menggunakan SPSS versi 15.0.
Hasil: Hasil penelitian ini menunjukkan bahwa ketajaman penglihatan pada PACG akut terbanyak adalah kebutaan (40,90%). Ketajaman penglihatan pada PACG kronis terbanyak adalah normal / visual impairment ringan (86,36%). Hasil pengujian statistik menunjukkan p-value <0,001 (p<0,05).
Kesimpulan: Ketajaman penglihatan terbanyak pada PACG akut adalah kebutaan sedangkan pada PACG kronis adalah normal / visual impairment ringan, sehingga perlu penanganan yang lebih cepat terutama kepada pasien dengan PACG akut untuk menghindari terjadinya kebutaan secara permanen pada pasien tersebut.
Downloads
References
Kang JM, Tanna AP. Glaucoma. Med Clin North Am. 2021;105(3):493–510.
Gupta D, Chen PP. Glaucoma. Am Fam Physician. 2016;93(8):668–74.
Sihota R, Angmo D, Ramaswamy D, Dada T. Simplifying “target” intraocular pressure for different stages of primary open-angle glaucoma and primary angle-closure glaucoma. Indian J Ophthalmol. 2018;66(4):495.
Allison K, Patel D, Alabi O. Epidemiology of glaucoma: The past, present, and predictions for the future. Cureus. 2020;12(11).
Zhang N, Wang J, Chen B, Li Y, Jiang B. Prevalence of primary angle closure glaucoma in the last 20 years: A meta-analysis and systematic review. Front Med. 2021;7(January):1–10.
Pusat Data dan Informasi Kementerian Kesehatan RI. Situasi glaukoma di Indonesia. Infodatin. 2019. p. 1–9.
Bourne RRA, Taylor HR, Flaxman SR, Keeffe J, Leasher J, Naidoo K, et al. Number of people blind or visually impaired by glaucoma worldwide and in world regions 1990 - 2010: A meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2016;11(10):1–16.
Sun X, Dai Y, Chen Y, Yu DY, Cringle SJ, Chen J, et al. Primary angle closure glaucoma: What we know and what we don’t know. Prog Retin Eye Res. 2017;57:26–45.
Tham CC, Editor C, Roy H. Primary angle-closure glaucoma [Internet]. Medscape. 2021 [cited 2023 Nov 26]. Available from: https://emedicine.medscape.com/article/1205154-overview
Jonas JB, Aung T, Bourne RR, Bron AM, Ritch R, Panda-Jonas S. Glaucoma. Lancet. 2017;390(10108):2183–93.
Napier ML, Azuara-Blanco A. Changing patterns in treatment of angle closure glaucoma. Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2018;29(2):130–4.
Cantor LB, Rapuano CJ, McCannel CA. Section 10: Glaucoma. In: Girkin CA, Bhorade AM, Crowston JG, Giaconi JA, Medeiros FA, Sit AJ, et al., editors. Basic and clinical science course (BCSC). 2019th–2020th ed. San Francisco: The American Academy of Ophthalmology; 2019. p. 1–281.
Matsuura M, Hirasawa K, Murata H, Asaoka R. The relationship between visual acuity and the reproducibility of visual field measurements in glaucoma patients. Investig Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2015;56(9):5630–5.
Annoh R, Loo CY, Hogan B, Tan HL, Tang LS, Tatham AJ. Accuracy of detection of patients with narrow angles by community optometrists in Scotland. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 2019;39(2):104–12.
Rayungsista A. Characteristics of primary glaucoma in eye clinic of RA Basoeni Hospital, Mojokerto, Indonesia. Folia Medica Indones. 2018;54(3):172.
Li S, Shao M, Wan Y, Tang B, Sun X, Cao W. Relationship between ocular biometry and severity of primary angle-closure glaucoma: relevance for predictive, preventive, and personalized medicine. EPMA J. 2019;10(3):261–71.
Addepalli UK, Jonnadula GB, Garudadri CS, Khanna RC, Papas EB. Prevalence of primary glaucoma as diagnosed by study optometrists of L. V. Prasad Eye Institute–Glaucoma Epidemiology and Molecular Genetics Study. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 2019;26(3):150–4.
Gao F, Wang J, Chen J, Wang X, Chen Y, Sun X. Etiologies and clinical characteristics of young patients with angle-closure glaucoma: a 15-year single-center retrospective study. Graefe’s Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2021;259(8):2379–87.
Helayel H, AlOqab A, Al Subaie M, Al Habash A. Profile of glaucoma in the Eastern region of Saudi Arabia: A retrospective study. Saudi J Med Med Sci. 2021;9(2):167.
Ariesti A, Herriadi D. Profile of glaucoma at The Dr M Djamil Hospital Padang West Sumatera. J Kesehat Andalas. 2018;7(Supplement 1):34.
Tham YC, Li X, Wong TY, Quigley HA, Aung T, Cheng CY. Global prevalence of glaucoma and projections of glaucoma burden through 2040: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Ophthalmology. 2014;121(11):2081–90.
Alzuhairy S, Alalola FS, AlAkeel HA, Alayed DM, Al-Harbi IM, Al-Shetwi MM, et al. Profile and management outcomes of glaucoma cases at Qassim University Hospital. Int J Health Sci (Qassim). 2018;12(5):20–4.
Mokhles P, van Gorcom L, Schouten JSAG, Berendschot TTJM, Beckers HJM, Webers CAB. Contributing ocular comorbidity to end-of-life visual acuity in medically treated glaucoma patients, ocular hypertension and glaucoma suspect patients. Eye. 2021;35(3):883–91.
Parikh R, Kitnarong N, Jonas JB, Parikh SR, Thomas R. Optic disc morphology in primary open-angle glaucoma versus primary angle-closure glaucoma in South India. Indian J Ophthalmol. 2021;69(7):1833–8.
Talaspayeva A, Zhamanbalina Z, Khouri AS. Biometric comparators in Central Asians with primary angle closure glaucoma (PACG) versus primary angle open glaucoma (PAOG). Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2019 Jul 22;60(9):1998.
Kyari F, Gilbert C, Blanchet K, Wormald R. Improving services for glaucoma care in Nigeria: implications for policy and programmes to achieve universal health coverage. Br J Ophthalmol. 2017 May;101(5):543–7.
Ilahi F, Prahasta A, Susanti R, Jamsari J. Correlation between locus polymorphism of col11a1 gene and ocular biometry in acute and chronic primary angle closure glaucoma. Asian J Pharm Clin Res. 2021;14(5):41–5.
Buteikiene D, Paunksnis A, Barzdžiukas V, Žaliuniene D, Balčiuniene JV, Jegelevičius D. Correlations between digital planimetry and optical coherence tomography, confocal scanning laser ophthalmoscopy in assessment of optic disc parameters. Med. 2012;48(3):150–8.
Yousefi S, Sakai H, Murata H, Fujino Y, Garway-Heath D, Weinreb R, et al. Asymmetric patterns of visual field defect in primary open-angle and primary angle-closure glaucoma. Investig Opthalmology Vis Sci. 2018 Mar 5;59(3):1279.
Kim JH, Lee HS, Kim NR, Seong GJ, Kim CY. Relationship between visual acuity and retinal structures measured by spectral domain optical coherence tomography in patients with open-angle glaucoma. Investig Opthalmology Vis Sci. 2014 Aug 4;55(8):4801.
George R, Panda S, Vijaya L. Blindness in glaucoma: primary open-angle glaucoma versus primary angle-closure glaucoma—a meta-analysis [Internet]. Eye. 2021 [cited 2022 Feb 22]. Available from: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41433-021-01802-9
Runjić T, Lauš KN, Vatavuk Z. Effect of different visual impairment levels on the quality of life in glaucoma patients. Acta Clin Croat. 2018;57(2):243–50.
Ilahi F, Liyanti R. Quality of life assessment glaucoma patients based on glaucoma symptom scale and glaucoma quality of life-15 score at M. Djamil Hospital Padang. Ophthalmol Indones. 2019;43(1):57.
Downloads
Submitted
Accepted
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Oftalmologi Jurnal Kesehatan Mata Indonesia
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
This work is licensed under a 