Work

Vision impairment and service utilization among cancer survivors and the general population in the US.

Year: 2025

Type: conference-abstract

Abstract: 105 Background: Cancer survivors face various health issues and require unique care and services. Vision health, an essential component of overall health and quality of life, has received little attention in cancer survivors. This study explored vision impairment and service utilization in cancer survivors and the general population without a cancer history in the US. Methods: We analyzed data from the 2023 National Health Interview Survey, which used stratified clustering sampling to interview US adults. Vision impairment was defined as difficulty seeing even when wearing glasses/contact lenses (GCLs) using a 4-point Likert scale: no difficulty, some difficulty, a lot of difficulty, and cannot see at all. Participants were asked 1) when they last had an eye exam and 2) whether a health professional had recommended vision assistive or adaptive devices (VAAD). They were also asked whether they had a separate plan covering vision services, used any VAAD, and wore prescription GCLs to read up close and see at a distance. We compared weighted percentages using Rao-Scott Chi-squared tests and computed the P -trend using the Cochran-Armitage test. Weighted logistic regression models were fit, adjusting for sociodemographic factors. Results: Of 29,484 adults (weighted sample: 257,928,581; mean age: 48 years), 9.7% were cancer survivors. Compared to the general population, a higher proportion of survivors reported some difficulty (22.0% [95% CI: 20.5-23.5%] vs 16.9% [95% CI: 16.3-17.6%]) and a lot of difficulty (2.7% [95% CI: 2.1-3.4%] vs 1.1% [95% CI: 1.0-1.3%]) ( P -trend < .001). Survivors were less likely to have a separate vision plan (24.9% [95% CI: 23.2-26.6%] vs 28.9% [95% CI: 28.1-29.8%]; P < .001) but more likely to have had an eye exam within the past year (59.0% [95% CI: 57.1-60.9%] vs 37.5% [95% CI: 36.6-38.3%]; P < .001) compared to the general population. A higher percentage of survivors utilized any VAAD than the general population (23.5% [95% CI: 20.4-26.5%] vs 14.2% [95% CI: 13.0-15.5%]; P < .001). Survivors had greater odds of having received professional recommendations for vision services (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 1.45, 95% CI: 1.04-2.01) and needing prescription GCLs to read up close (AOR 1.16, 95% CI: 1.05-1.28) or see at a distance (AOR 1.10, 95% CI: 1.01-1.21). Additionally, Hispanic and Black adults had lower odds of having used vision services than White adults. Similar trends were observed in the subset of older (≥65 years) adults. Conclusions: Vision impairment was prevalent in US cancer survivors, highlighting the importance of screening, early intervention, and better services for vision impairment. Survivorship programs should identify and address vision health gaps and unmet care needs, specially to support the growing and aging population of cancer survivors. Future research can consider the impact of vision impairment and care disparities on cancer survivors’ health and quality of life.

Source: JCO Oncology Practice

DOI: 10.1200/op.2025.21.10_suppl.105