Perceptions of Spectacle Use Among Undergraduate Students in Oman: Visual Symptoms, Convenience, and Disadvantages
Abstract
1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Study Design
2.2. Study Setting
2.3. Participants
2.4. Data Sources/Study Instrument Used
2.5. Study Size
2.6. Statistical Methods
2.7. Ethical Considerations
3. Results
3.1. Demographic Profile of the Participants
3.2. Descriptive Statistics for the Perception Towards Spectacle Wear-Related Visual Symptoms Among the Participants
3.3. Level of Concern Towards Spectacle Wear-Related Visual Symptoms Among the Participants
3.4. Perception Towards Spectacle Usage-Related Convenience Among the Participants
3.5. Perceived Spectacle Usage-Related Convenience Observed Among the Participants
3.6. Perception Spectacle Usage-Related Disadvantages Among the Participants
3.7. Perceived Spectacle Usage-Related Disadvantages Among the Participants
3.8. Impact of Sociodemographic Factors on Perceived Convenience and Disadvantages Related to Spectacle Usage
4. Discussion
Study Limitations and Future Research
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
Abbreviations
WHO | World Health Organization |
COHS | College of Health Sciences |
COB | College of Business |
COE | College of Engineering |
COL | College of Law |
CFS | Center for Foundation Studies |
References
- Pascolini, D.; Mariotti, S.P. Global estimates of visual impairment: 2010. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 2012, 96, 614–618. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Galvis, V.; Tello, A.; Camacho, P.A.; Gómez, L.M.; Rey, J.J.; Serrano, A.A. Definition of refractive errors for research studies: Spherical equivalent could not be enough. J. Optom. 2021, 14, 224–225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Dandona, R.; Dandona, L. Refractive error blindness. Bull. World Health Organ. 2001, 79, 237–243. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
- Holden, B.A.; Sulaiman, S.; Knox, K. The challenge of providing spectacles in the developing world. Community Eye Health 2000, 13, 9–10. [Google Scholar]
- Al-Rashidi, S.H.; Albahouth, A.A.; Althwini, W.A.; Alsohibani, A.A.; Alnughaymishi, A.A.; Alsaeed, A.A.; Al-Rashidi, F.H.; Almatrafi, S. Prevalence Refractive Errors among Medical Students of Qassim University, Saudi Arabia: Cross-Sectional Descriptive Study. Open Access Maced. J. Med. Sci. 2018, 6, 940–943. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dong, L.; Zhou, W.D.; Hu, Y.B.; Wei, L.; Cao, W.; Chen, N.H.; Liu, D.; Zhen, C.; Zheng, Y.-C.; Jonas, J.B.; et al. Prevalence of Myopia and Axial Length Distribution in China: The Wuhu Children and Adolescents Eye Study. Investig. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2025, 66, 33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Moreira-Rosário, A.; Lanca, C.; Grzybowski, A. Prevalence of myopia in Europe: A systematic review and meta-analysis of data from 14 countries. Lancet Reg. Health Eur. 2025, 54, 101319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Modjtahedi, B.S.; Abbott, R.L.; Fong, D.S.; Lum, F.; Tan, D., on behalf of Task Force on Myopia. Reducing the Global Burden of Myopia by Delaying the Onset of Myopia and Reducing Myopic Progression in Children: The Academy’s Task Force on Myopia. Ophthalmology 2021, 128, 816–826. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ovenseri-Ogbomo, G.; Osuagwu, U.L.; Ekpenyong, B.N.; Agho, K.; Ekure, E.; Ndep, A.O.; Ocansey, S.; Mashige, K.P.; Naidoo, K.S.; Ogbuehi, K.C.; et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of myopia prevalence in African school children. PLoS ONE 2022, 17, e0263335. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kobia-Acquah, E. Attitudes and Beliefs of Undergraduate Students to Spectacle Wear in Ghana. Adv. Ophthalmol. Vis. Syst. 2018, 8, 264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Galvis, V.; Tello, A.; Otero, J.; Serrano, A.A.; Gómez, L.M.; Camacho, P.A.; López-Jaramillo, J.P. Prevalence of refractive errors in Colombia: MIOPUR study. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 2018, 102, 1320–1323. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- French, A.N.; Morgan, I.G.; Burlutsky, G.; Mitchell, P.; Rose, K.A. Prevalence and 5- to 6-year incidence and progression of myopia and hyperopia in Australian schoolchildren. Ophthalmology 2013, 120, 1482–1491. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, S.S.Y.; Mackey, D.A. Prevalence and Risk Factors of Myopia in Young Adults: Review of Findings From the Raine Study. Front. Public Health 2022, 10, 861044. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- WHO. Sight test and glasses could dramatically improve the lives of 150 million people with poor vision. Indian J. Med. Sci. 2006, 60, 485–486. [Google Scholar]
- Alhibshi, N.; Kamal, Y.; Aljohani, L.; Alsaeedi, H.; Ezzat, S.; Mandora, N. Attitude toward refractive error surgery and other correction methods: A cross-sectional study. Ann. Med. Surg. 2021, 72, 103104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kobia-Acquah, E.; Flitcroft, D.I.; Akowuah, P.K.; Lingham, G.; Loughman, J. Regional variations and temporal trends of childhood myopia prevalence in Africa: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Ophthalmic Physiol. Opt. 2022, 42, 1232–1252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Khoshhal, F.; Hashemi, H.; Hooshmand, E.; Saatchi, M.; Yekta, A.; Aghamirsalim, M.; Ostadimoghaddam, H.; Khabazkhoob, M. The prevalence of refractive errors in the Middle East: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Int. Ophthalmol. 2020, 40, 1571–1586. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Vankudre, G.S.; Noushad, B. Barriers and Perception Towards Spectacle Wear among Student Population of University of Buraimi, Oman. Sultan Qaboos Univ. Med. J. 2021, 21, 416–422. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alrashidi, N.O.; Albrak, W.A.; Alreshidi, S.O.; Alaradi, L.A.; Nagi Adam, H.A.; Alali, N.M.; Hashem, F.; Albalawi, H.B.; Alothman, A.Y.; Alharbi, S.S. The Perception of Spectacles Use Among the General Population in Ha’il Region, Saudi Arabia: A Cross-Sectional Study. Clin. Ophthalmol. 2023, 17, 3629–3636. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Johnson, G.J. (Ed.) Epidemiology of Eye Disease, 3rd ed.; Distributed by World Scientific; Imperial College Press: Hackensack, NJ, USA; London, UK; Singapore, 2012; 645p. [Google Scholar]
- Resnikoff, S. Global magnitude of visual impairment caused by uncorrected refractive errors in 2004. Bull. World Health Organ. 2008, 86, 63–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Desalegn, A.; Tsegaw, A.; Shiferaw, D.; Woretaw, H. Knowledge, attitude, practice and associated factors towards spectacles use among adults in Gondar town, northwest Ethiopia. BMC Ophthalmol. 2016, 16, 184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Davey, J.; King, C.; Fitzpatrick, M. Perceptions of glasses as a health care product: A pilot study of New Zealand baby boomers. Health Mark Q. 2012, 29, 346–361. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ebeigbe, J.A.; Kio, F.; Okafor, L.I. Attitude and beliefs of Nigerian undergraduates to spectacle wear. Ghana Med. J. 2013, 47, 70–73. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
- Leder, H.; Forster, M.; Gerger, G. The Glasses Stereotype Revisited: Effects of Eyeglasses on Perception, Recognition, and Impression of Faces. Swiss J. Psychol. 2011, 70, 211–222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Maitreya, A.; Dhasmana, R. Spectacles and Refractive Errors: Children’s Perspective. Delhi J. Ophthalmol. 2017, 28, 12–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Odedra, N.; Wedner, S.H.; Shigongo, Z.S.; Nyalali, K.; Gilbert, C. Barriers to spectacle use in Tanzanian secondary school students. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 2008, 15, 410–417. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Rosman, M.; Wong, T.Y.; Wong, W.; Wong, M.L.; Saw, S.M. Knowledge and beliefs associated with refractive errors and undercorrection: The Singapore Malay Eye Study. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 2009, 93, 4–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rustagi, N.; Uppal, Y.; Taneja, D.K. Screening for visual impairment: Outcome among schoolchildren in a rural area of Delhi. Indian J. Ophthalmol. 2012, 60, 203–206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Adeoti, C.O. Beliefs and attitude towards spectacles. Niger J. Clin. Pract. 2009, 12, 359–361. [Google Scholar]
- Westman, M.; Liinamaa, M.J. Relief of asthenopic symptoms with orthoptic exercises in convergence insufficiency is achieved in both adults and children. J. Optom. 2012, 5, 62–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Khandekar, R.; Mohammed, A.J.; Al Raisi, A. Compliance of spectacle wear and its determinants among schoolchildren of Dhakhiliya region of Oman: A descriptive study. J. Sci. Res. Med. Sci. 2002, 4, 39–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Pavithra, M.; Hamsa, L.; Madhukumar, S. Factors associated with spectacle-wear compliance among school children of 7-15 years in South India. Int. J. Med. Public Health 2014, 4, 146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hutchinson, A.K.; Morse, C.L.; Hercinovic, A.; Cruz, O.A.; Sprunger, D.T.; Repka, M.X.; Lambert, S.R.; Wallace, D.K.; American Academy of Ophthalmology Preferred Practice Pattern Pediatric Ophthalmology/Strabismus Panel. Pediatric Eye Evaluations Preferred Practice Pattern. Ophthalmology 2023, 130, P222–P270. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [PubMed Central]
- O’Leary, C.I.; Evans, B.J. Criteria for prescribing optometric interventions: Literature review and practitioner survey. Ophthalmic Physiol. Opt. 2003, 23, 429–439. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Sprunger, D.T.; Lambert, S.R.; Hercinovic, A.; Morse, C.L.; Repka, M.X.; Hutchinson, A.K.; Cruz, O.A.; Wallace, D.K.; American Academy of Ophthalmology Preferred Practice Pattern Pediatric Ophthalmology/Strabismus Panel. Esotropia and Exotropia Preferred Practice Pattern®. Ophthalmology 2023, 130, P179–P221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [PubMed Central]
Descriptive Statistics | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Minimum | Maximum | Mean (Out of 5) | Std. Deviation | |
Can wearing glasses (spectacles) cause any of the problems listed below? (Rate the factors listed below using a Likert scale with 4 being strongly agree and 0 being strongly disagree) [Light sensitivity] | 0 | 4 | 3.03 | 1.30 |
Can wearing glasses (spectacles) cause any of the problems listed below? (Rate the factors listed below using a Likert scale with 4 being strongly agree and 0 being strongly disagree) [Headache] | 0 | 4 | 2.34 | 1.00 |
Can wearing glasses (spectacles) cause any of the problems listed below? (Rate the factors listed below using a Likert scale with 4 being strongly agree and 0 being strongly disagree) [Glare] | 0 | 4 | 2.19 | 0.97 |
Can wearing glasses (spectacles) cause any of the problems listed below? (Rate the factors listed below using a Likert scale with 4 being strongly agree and 0 being strongly disagree) [Eye pain] | 0 | 4 | 3.04 | 1.25 |
Can wearing glasses (spectacles) cause any of the problems listed below? (Rate the factors listed below using a Likert scale with 4 being strongly agree and 0 being strongly disagree) [Blurry vision] | 0 | 4 | 2.05 | 0.97 |
Can wearing glasses (spectacles) cause any of the problems listed below? (Rate the factors listed below using a Likert scale with 4 being strongly agree and 0 being strongly disagree) [Ghost images] | 0 | 4 | 2.30 | 1.07 |
Can wearing glasses (spectacles) cause any of the problems listed below? (Rate the factors listed below using a Likert scale with 4 being strongly agree and 0 being strongly disagree) [Difficulty with night vision] | 0 | 4 | 2.89 | 1.29 |
Can wearing glasses (spectacles) cause any of the problems listed below? (Rate the factors listed below using a Likert scale with 4 being strongly agree and 0 being strongly disagree) [Fluctuation of vision] | 0 | 4 | 2.22 | 0.95 |
Mean score for spectacle-related visual symptoms | 0.000 | 4.000 | 2.51 | 0.75 |
Percentage mean score for spectacle-related visual symptoms | 0.00% | 80.00% | 50.18% | 14.97% |
Gender | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Level of Perceived Concern for Spectacle-Related Visual Symptoms | Male | Female | Total | Pearson Chi-Square | ||||
N | % | N | % | N | % | Value | p Value | |
Little concern | 34 | 25.6% | 118 | 41.8% | 152 | 36.6% | 10.345 | 0.006 |
Moderate concern | 94 | 70.7% | 155 | 55.0% | 249 | 60.0% | ||
Severe Concern | 5 | 3.8% | 9 | 3.2% | 14 | 3.4% | ||
Total | 133 | 100.0% | 282 | 100.0% | 415 | 100.0% |
Mean | Std. Deviation | |
---|---|---|
Rate spectacle usage-related convenience for the following categories on a scale of 0 to 4, with 4 being the highest convenience and 0 being the least convenience [Easy to use] | 2.48 | 1.08 |
Rate spectacle usage-related convenience for the following categories on a scale of 0 to 4, with 4 being the highest convenience and 0 being the least convenience [Least maintenance] | 2.66 | 0.90 |
Rate spectacle usage-related convenience for the following categories on a scale of 0 to 4, with 4 being the highest convenience and 0 being the least convenience [Affordability] | 3.02 | 1.58 |
Mean score of spectacle usage-related convenience | 2.72 | 0.97 |
Percentage mean score of spectacle usage-related convenience | 54.33% | 19.31% |
Gender | Total | ||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Male | Male_95% CI | Female | Female_95% CI | Total_95% CI | Pearson Chi-Square | ||||||
Perceived level of spectacle usage-related convenience | N | % | N | % | N | % | Value | p-Value | |||
Highly convenient | 1 | 0.8% | (0.0%, 2.3%) | 18 | 6.4% | (3.5%, 9.2%) | 19 | 4.6% | (2.7%, 6.7%) | 21.12 | <0.001 |
Less convenience | 35 | 26.3% | (18.8%, 33.8%) | 122 | 43.3% | (37.6%, 48.9%) | 157 | 37.8% | (33.3%, 42.4%) | ||
Moderate convenience | 97 | 72.9% | (65.4%, 80.5%) | 142 | 50.4% | (44.7%, 56.0%) | 239 | 57.6% | (52.8%, 62.4%) | ||
Total | 133 | 100.0% | — | 282 | 100.0% | — | 415 | 100.0% | — |
Minimum | Maximum | Mean | Std. Deviation | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Rate the spectacle usage-related disadvantages for the following categories on a scale of 0 to 4, with 4 being strongly agree and 0 being strongly disagree [Maintenance issue] | 0 | 4 | 2.78 | 1.35 |
Rate the spectacle usage-related disadvantages for the following categories on a scale of 0 to 4, with 4 being strongly agree and 0 being strongly disagree [Restriction on daily life] | 0 | 4 | 2.88 | 1.26 |
Rate the spectacle usage-related disadvantages for the following categories on a scale of 0 to 4, with 4 being strongly agree and 0 being strongly disagree [Cosmetic concerns] | 0 | 4 | 2.99 | 1.24 |
Mean spectacle usage-related disadvantages | 0.00 | 4.00 | 2.88 | 1.16 |
Percentage spectacle usage-related disadvantages | 0.00% | 80.00% | 57.69% | 23.15% |
Gender | |||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Male | Male_CI | Female | Female_CI | Total | Total_CI | Pearson Chi-Square | |||||
Level of spectacle usage-related disadvantages | N | % | N | % | N | % | Value | p-Value | |||
Highly disadvantageous | 90 | 67.7% | (59.4%, 75.2%) | 95 | 33.7% | (28.4%, 39.4%) | 185 | 44.6% | (39.8%, 49.4%) | 42.265 | <0.001 |
Hardly disadvantageous | 33 | 24.8% | (18.0%, 32.3%) | 146 | 51.8% | (46.1%, 57.4%) | 179 | 43.1% | (38.3%, 48.0%) | ||
Moderately disadvantageous | 10 | 7.5% | (3.0%, 12.0%) | 41 | 14.5% | (10.6%, 18.8%) | 51 | 12.3% | (9.2%, 15.4%) | ||
Total | 133 | 100.0% | 282 | 100.0% | 415 | 100.0% |
Attribute | Spectacle-Related Disadvantages | Spectacle-Related Convenience | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Wald Chi-Square | df | Sig. | Wald Chi-Square | df | Sig. | |
(Intercept) | 837.058 | 1 | <0.001 | 690.811 | 1 | <0.001 |
Study Major | 91.553 | 4 | <0.001 | 72.922 | 4 | <0.001 |
Gender | 0.752 | 1 | 0.386 | 9.904 | 1 | 0.002 |
Age in years | 139.354 | 3 | <0.001 | 78.708 | 3 | <0.001 |
Geographical location | 2.756 | 1 | 0.097 | 3.991 | 1 | 0.046 |
Occupation of father | 9.219 | 1 | 0.002 | 3.615 | 1 | 0.057 |
Occupation of mother | 11.896 | 1 | 0.001 | 4.193 | 1 | 0.041 |
Father’s literacy status | 6.995 | 2 | 0.030 | 12.733 | 2 | 0.002 |
Mother’s literacy status | 1.300 | 2 | 0.522 | 16.002 | 2 | <0.001 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2025 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Ayyappan, J.P.; Alrahbi, H.; Vankudre, G.; Mohamed, Z.; Varghese, V.; Sadandan, S. Perceptions of Spectacle Use Among Undergraduate Students in Oman: Visual Symptoms, Convenience, and Disadvantages. Healthcare 2025, 13, 2525. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare13192525
Ayyappan JP, Alrahbi H, Vankudre G, Mohamed Z, Varghese V, Sadandan S. Perceptions of Spectacle Use Among Undergraduate Students in Oman: Visual Symptoms, Convenience, and Disadvantages. Healthcare. 2025; 13(19):2525. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare13192525
Chicago/Turabian StyleAyyappan, Janitha Plackal, Hilal Alrahbi, Gopi Vankudre, Zoelfigar Mohamed, Virgina Varghese, and Sabitha Sadandan. 2025. "Perceptions of Spectacle Use Among Undergraduate Students in Oman: Visual Symptoms, Convenience, and Disadvantages" Healthcare 13, no. 19: 2525. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare13192525
APA StyleAyyappan, J. P., Alrahbi, H., Vankudre, G., Mohamed, Z., Varghese, V., & Sadandan, S. (2025). Perceptions of Spectacle Use Among Undergraduate Students in Oman: Visual Symptoms, Convenience, and Disadvantages. Healthcare, 13(19), 2525. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare13192525