Table 2.
Number of spectacles within tolerance limits of baseline refraction for each spectacle component of quality according to district
| Spectacle component | District, n (%) | Total (n=266) | ||
| Jhang (n=65) | Khanewal (n=123) | Sahiwal (n=78) | ||
| Sphere power | 36 (55.4%) | 102 (82.9%) | 74 (94.9%) | 212 (79.7%) |
| Cylinder power | 63 (96.9%) | 121 (98.4%) | 78 (100.0%) | 262 (98.5%) |
| Cylinder axis* | 1 (11.1%) | 0 (0.0%) | 19 (100.0%) | 20 (37.7%) |
| Horizontal prism | 29 (44.6%) | 97 (78.9%) | 35 (44.9%) | 161 (60.5%) |
| Vertical prism | 65 (100.0%) | 123 (100%) | 78 (100%) | 266 (100%) |
| All criteria | 9 (13.8%) | 74 (60.2%) | 35 (44.9%) | 118 (44.4%) |
*Axis assessed among three unannounced standardised patients from each district with non-zero cylinder power detected at baseline: 9, 25 and 19 pairs of spectacles in Jhang, Khanewal, and Sahiwal, respectively.