Screening for Primary Open-Angle Glaucoma: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement | Geriatrics | JN Learning | AMA Ed Hub [Skip to Content]
[Skip to Content Landing]

Screening for Primary Open-Angle GlaucomaUS Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement

To identify the key insights or developments described in this article
1 Credit CME
Abstract

Importance  Glaucoma affects an estimated 2.7 million people in the US. It is the second-leading cause of irreversible blindness in the US and the leading cause of blindness in Black and Hispanic/Latino persons.

Objective  To update its 2013 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review to evaluate the benefits and harms of screening for glaucoma in adults.

Population  Adults 40 years or older who present in primary care and do not have signs or symptoms of open-angle glaucoma.

Evidence Assessment  The USPSTF concludes that the evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for glaucoma in adults. The benefits and harms of screening for glaucoma in adults are uncertain. More research is needed.

Recommendation  The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for primary open-angle glaucoma in adults. (I statement)

Sign in to take quiz and track your certificates

Buy This Activity

JN Learning™ is the home for CME and MOC from the JAMA Network. Search by specialty or US state and earn AMA PRA Category 1 CME Credit™ from articles, audio, Clinical Challenges and more. Learn more about CME/MOC

CME Disclosure Statement: Unless noted, all individuals in control of content reported no relevant financial relationships. If applicable, all relevant financial relationships have been mitigated.

Article Information

Corresponding Author: Carol M. Mangione, MD, MSPH, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, 1100 Glendon Ave, Ste 900, Los Angeles, CA 90024 (chair@uspstf.net).

Accepted for Publication: April 14, 2022.

The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) Members: Carol M. Mangione, MD, MSPH; Michael J. Barry, MD; Wanda K. Nicholson, MD, MPH, MBA; Michael Cabana, MD, MA, MPH; David Chelmow, MD; Tumaini Rucker Coker, MD, MBA; Esa M. Davis, MD, MPH; Katrina E. Donahue, MD, MPH; John W. Epling Jr, MD, MSEd; Carlos Roberto Jaén, MD, PhD, MS; Alex H. Krist, MD, MPH; Martha Kubik, PhD, RN; Li Li, MD, PhD, MPH; Gbenga Ogedegbe, MD, MPH; Lori Pbert, PhD; John M. Ruiz, PhD; Melissa A. Simon, MD, MPH; James Stevermer, MD, MSPH; John B. Wong, MD.

Affiliations of The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) Members: University of California, Los Angeles (Mangione); Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts (Barry); University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (Nicholson, Donahue); Albert Einstein College of Medicine, New York, New York (Cabana); Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond (Chelmow, Krist); University of Washington, Seattle (Coker); University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania (Davis); Virginia Tech Carilion School of Medicine, Roanoke (Epling Jr); The University of Texas Health Science Center, San Antonio (Jaén); Fairfax Family Practice Residency, Fairfax, Virginia (Krist); George Mason University, Fairfax, Virginia (Kubik); University of Virginia, Charlottesville (Li); New York University, New York, New York (Ogedegbe); University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester (Pbert); University of Arizona, Tucson (Ruiz); Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois (Simon); University of Missouri, Columbia (Stevermer); Tufts University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts (Wong).

Author Contributions: Dr Mangione had full access to all of the data in the study and takes responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis. The USPSTF members contributed equally to the recommendation statement.

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: Authors followed the policy regarding conflicts of interest described at https://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/Page/Name/conflict-of-interest-disclosures. All members of the USPSTF receive travel reimbursement and an honorarium for participating in USPSTF meetings.

Funding/Support: The USPSTF is an independent, voluntary body. The US Congress mandates that the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) support the operations of the USPSTF.

Role of the Funder/Sponsor: AHRQ staff assisted in the following: development and review of the research plan, commission of the systematic evidence review from an Evidence-based Practice Center, coordination of expert review and public comment of the draft evidence report and draft recommendation statement, and the writing and preparation of the final recommendation statement and its submission for publication. AHRQ staff had no role in the approval of the final recommendation statement or the decision to submit for publication.

Disclaimer: Recommendations made by the USPSTF are independent of the US government. They should not be construed as an official position of AHRQ or the US Department of Health and Human Services.

Additional Contributions: We thank Tina Fan, MD, MPH (AHRQ), and Justin Mills, MD, MPH (AHRQ), who contributed to the writing of the manuscript, and Lisa Nicolella, MA (AHRQ), who assisted with coordination and editing.

Additional Information: The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) makes recommendations about the effectiveness of specific preventive care services for patients without obvious related signs or symptoms. It bases its recommendations on the evidence of both the benefits and harms of the service and an assessment of the balance. The USPSTF does not consider the costs of providing a service in this assessment. The USPSTF recognizes that clinical decisions involve more considerations than evidence alone. Clinicians should understand the evidence but individualize decision-making to the specific patient or situation. Similarly, the USPSTF notes that policy and coverage decisions involve considerations in addition to the evidence of clinical benefits and harms. Published by JAMA®—Journal of the American Medical Association under arrangement with the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ). ©2022 AMA and United States Government, as represented by the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), by assignment from the members of the United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF). All rights reserved.

References
1.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Vision loss: a public health problem. Updated June 12, 2020. Accessed April 5, 2022. https://www.cdc.gov/visionhealth/basic_information/vision_loss.htm
2.
Sommer  A , Tielsch  JM , Katz  J ,  et al.  Relationship between intraocular pressure and primary open angle glaucoma among white and black Americans: the Baltimore Eye Survey.   Arch Ophthalmol. 1991;109(8):1090-1095. doi:10.1001/archopht.1991.01080080050026PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
3.
Vajaranant  TS , Wu  S , Torres  M , Varma  R .  The changing face of primary open-angle glaucoma in the United States: demographic and geographic changes from 2011 to 2050.   Am J Ophthalmol. 2012;154(2):303-314. doi:10.1016/j.ajo.2012.02.024PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
4.
US Preventive Services Task Force. US Preventive Services Task Force Procedure Manual. Published May 2021. Accessed April 5, 2022. https://uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/uspstf/about-uspstf/methods-and-processes/procedure-manual
5.
Prum  BE  Jr , Lim  MC , Mansberger  SL ,  et al; American Academy of Ophthalmology.  Primary open-angle glaucoma suspect Preferred Practice Pattern guidelines.   Ophthalmology. 2016;123(1):112-151. doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2015.10.055PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
6.
Dielemans  I , Vingerling  JR , Wolfs  RC , Hofman  A , Grobbee  DE , de Jong  PT .  The prevalence of primary open-angle glaucoma in a population-based study in The Netherlands: the Rotterdam Study.   Ophthalmology. 1994;101(11):1851-1855. doi:10.1016/S0161-6420(94)31090-6PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
7.
Chou  R , Selph  S , Blazina  I ,  et al.  Screening for Glaucoma in Adults: A Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force. Evidence Synthesis No. 214. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2022. AHRQ publication 21-05286-EF-1.
8.
Congdon  N , O’Colmain  B , Klaver  CC ,  et al; Eye Diseases Prevalence Research Group.  Causes and prevalence of visual impairment among adults in the United States.   Arch Ophthalmol. 2004;122(4):477-485. doi:10.1001/archopht.122.4.477PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
9.
Gupta  P , Zhao  D , Guallar  E , Ko  F , Boland  MV , Friedman  DS .  Prevalence of glaucoma in the United States: the 2005-2008 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey.   Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2016;57(6):2905-2913. doi:10.1167/iovs.15-18469PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
10.
Mitchell  P , Smith  W , Attebo  K , Healey  PR .  Prevalence of open-angle glaucoma in Australia: the Blue Mountains Eye Study.   Ophthalmology. 1996;103(10):1661-1669. doi:10.1016/S0161-6420(96)30449-1PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
11.
Varma  R , Ying-Lai  M , Francis  BA ,  et al; Los Angeles Latino Eye Study Group.  Prevalence of open-angle glaucoma and ocular hypertension in Latinos: the Los Angeles Latino Eye Study.   Ophthalmology. 2004;111(8):1439-1448. doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2004.01.025PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
12.
Tielsch  JM , Sommer  A , Katz  J , Royall  RM , Quigley  HA , Javitt  J .  Racial variations in the prevalence of primary open-angle glaucoma: the Baltimore Eye Survey.   JAMA. 1991;266(3):369-374. doi:10.1001/jama.1991.03470030069026PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
13.
Sommer  A , Tielsch  JM , Katz  J ,  et al.  Racial differences in the cause-specific prevalence of blindness in east Baltimore.   N Engl J Med. 1991;325(20):1412-1417. doi:10.1056/NEJM199111143252004PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
14.
American Academy of Ophthalmology. Primary open-angle glaucoma. Published 2016. Accessed April 5, 2022. https://www.aaojournal.org/article/S0161-6420(15)01276-2/pdf
15.
Moyer  VA ; US Preventive Services Task Force.  Screening for glaucoma: US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement.   Ann Intern Med. 2013;159(7):484-489. doi:10.7326/0003-4819-159-6-201309170-00685PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
16.
Chou  R , Selph  S , Blazina  I ,  et al.  Screening for glaucoma in adults: updated evidence report and systematic review for the US Preventive Services Task Force.   JAMA. Published May 24, 2022. doi:10.1001/jama.2022.6290Google Scholar
17.
American Academy of Ophthalmology. Frequency of ocular examinations—2015. Accessed April 5, 2022. https://www.aao.org/clinical-statement/frequency-of-ocular-examinations
18.
American Optometric Association. Comprehensive adult eye and vision examination. Accessed April 5, 2022. https://www.aoa.org/AOA/Documents/Practice%20Management/Clinical%20Guidelines/EBO%20Guidelines/Comprehensive%20Adult%20Eye%20and%20Vision%20Exam.pdf
19.
American Academy of Family Physicians. Clinical preventive service recommendation: glaucoma. Accessed April 5, 2022. https://www.aafp.org/family-physician/patient-care/clinical-recommendations/all-clinical-recommendations/glaucoma.html
Want full access to the AMA Ed Hub?
After you sign up for AMA Membership, make sure you sign in or create a Physician account with the AMA in order to access all learning activities on the AMA Ed Hub
Buy this activity
Close
Want full access to the AMA Ed Hub?
After you sign up for AMA Membership, make sure you sign in or create a Physician account with the AMA in order to access all learning activities on the AMA Ed Hub
Buy this activity
Close
With a personal account, you can:
  • Access free activities and track your credits
  • Personalize content alerts
  • Customize your interests
  • Fully personalize your learning experience
Education Center Collection Sign In Modal Right
Close

Name Your Search

Save Search
Close
With a personal account, you can:
  • Access free activities and track your credits
  • Personalize content alerts
  • Customize your interests
  • Fully personalize your learning experience
Close

Lookup An Activity

or

Close

My Saved Searches

You currently have no searches saved.

Close

My Saved Courses

You currently have no courses saved.

Close
With a personal account, you can:
  • Access free activities and track your credits
  • Personalize content alerts
  • Customize your interests
  • Fully personalize your learning experience
Education Center Collection Sign In Modal Right
Close