Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://dora.health.qld.gov.au/qldresearchjspui/handle/1/2356
Title: Community based vision screening in preschool children; performance of the Spot Vision Screener and optotype testing
Authors: Gole, G.
Beckman, T.
Shah, S. P.
Kapoor, V.
Issue Date: 2021
Source: , 2021
Journal: Ophthalmic Epidemiology
Abstract: Background: Children’s vision screening children commonly uses optotype-based visual acuity or instrument-based methods measuring amblyogenic risk factors (ARFs). Objective: To compare the performance of the Spot Vision Screener (SVS) (PediaVision, Welch Allyn, NY) and a nurse-administered visual acuity screen (NVAS) in identifying ARFs and decreased visual acuity. Methods: A prospective, cross-sectional population-based study of preschool children in South-East Queensland, Australia. Eligible participants had both forms of screening by trained community nurses. All children with an abnormal result by either method as well as a cohort of randomly selected children who passed both assessments were assessed at a tertiary paediatric ophthalmology clinic. Results: Over a 10 month period, 2237 children (mean age; 64.4 ± 4.0 months) were screened from 38 schools. 6.4% of children failed SVS and 8.3% failed NVAS (with 3.8% overlap, failing both). The positive predictive value (PPV) in identifying either ARFs and/or reduced VA for the SVS and NVAS was 70.4% (95% Confidence Interval (CI): 61.6%–78.2%) and 60.5% (95% CI: 52.6%–67.9%) respectively. Highest PPV to detect either ARFs and/or reduced VA was achieved by a ‘hybrid’ method by combining failed NVAS and failed SVS: 91.0% (95% CI: 82.4 to 96.3) but this would risk children with sight impairment being missed in the community. Conclusion: To our knowledge, this is the first population-based study providing detailed comparative measures of diagnostic accuracy for NVAS and SVS in preschool children. One in ten preschool children failed one or both screens. A number of children who required ophthalmic intervention were missed if only one screening method was utilized.L20135099742021-08-26
DOI: 10.1080/09286586.2021.1962918
Resources: https://www.embase.com/search/results?subaction=viewrecord&id=L2013509974&from=exporthttp://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09286586.2021.1962918 |
Keywords: prospective study;Queensland;risk factor;vision test;visual acuity;randomized controlled trial;adultamblyopia;article;child;cohort analysis;controlled study;diagnostic accuracy;diagnostic test accuracy study;female;human;human experiment;major clinical study;male;middle aged;nurse;ophthalmology;predictive value
Type: Article
Appears in Sites:Children's Health Queensland Publications

Show full item record

Page view(s)

74
checked on Mar 20, 2025

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in DORA are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.