Comparison of photorefraction by Plusoptix A12 and cycloplegic autorefraction in children.

BACKGROUND: Plusoptix photoscreeners are capable of measuring refractive errors of children from 1 meter distance, without cyloplegia. We aimed to compare refractive data obtained from the newest version of Plusoptix (model 12) with cycloplegic autorefraction. METHODS: We examined 111 consecutive children aged 3-7 years first by Plusoptix A12C under manifest condition and subsequently for cycloplegic refraction by Topcon KR-1 tabletop autorefractometer. Sphere, spherical equivalent, cylinder and axis of astigmatism measured by the two methods were analyzed to determine correlation, agreement and differences. RESULTS: Binocular examination of 111 children aged 4.86±1.27 years revealed good agreement between refractive data obtained by Plusoptix and cycloautorefraction, according to Bland-Altman plots. Significant (p < 0.001) and strong correlation was found between all refractive measurements (Pearson's r value of 0.707 for sphere, 0.756 for pherical equivalent, and 0.863 for cylinder). Plusoptix mean sphere, spherical equivalent and cylinder were 1.22, 0.56, and -1.32 D, respectively. Corresponding values for cycloautorefraction were 1.63, 1.00, and -1.26 D. The difference between axis of cylinder measured by the two methods was < 10° in 144 eyes (64.9%). CONCLUSIONS: Considering the significant agreement and correlation between Plusoptix photoscreener and cycloplegic autorefraction, the need for cycloplegic drops in refractive examination of children may be obviated. The mean difference between cylinder measurements are considerably trivial (0.06 D), but sphere is approximately 0.4 D underestimated by Plusoptix compared to cycloautorefraction, on average.

Barriers and facilitators to using ophthalmic clinical health services following school vision screening: a mixed-methods study.

OBJECTIVE: To identify determinants of the utilisation of ophthalmic clinical health services among students who failed school vision screening. METHODS: This study employed a sequential explanatory mixed methods design, underpinned by Andersen's Behavioural Model of Health Service Utilisation. Data were initially gathered through interviews with 27 stakeholders-comprising 5 ophthalmologists, 7 community doctors, 7 public health professionals and 8 teachers. The qualitative insights informed the construction of a questionnaire, which subsequently garnered responses from 6215 participants. Qualitative data underwent thematic analysis with NVivo V.12, while quantitative data were analysed using multivariable multinomial logistic regression in SAS V.9.4. Data integration was performed using the Pillar Integration Process for a deductive, evidence-based synthesis of findings. RESULTS: The research revealed that students attending vision demonstration schools and receiving encouragement from schools or communities to access clinical ophthalmic services demonstrated higher adherence to referral (OR=1.66, 95% CI 1.30 to 2.12; OR=1.54, 95% CI 1.33 to 1.80). Conversely, older students and those from higher-income families exhibited lower adherence rates (OR=0.31, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.44; OR=0.34, 95% CI 0.25 to 0.46). Moreover, students with less urgent medical needs were more likely to adhere to referrals compared with those needing immediate referrals (OR=1.24, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.45).Four pillars emerged: (a) adherence decreased with age, (b) financial constraints did not pose an obstacle, (c) public health services played a critical role, (d) referral urgency did not linearly correlate with adherence. CONCLUSION: The utilisation of ophthalmic clinical health services following vision screening failure in students is significantly influenced by public health services provided by schools or communities, such as prompting those with abnormal screening results to access ophthalmic clinical health services.

Preliminary study of a new online and equipment-free vision screening alternative for remote and isolated community.

INTRODUCTION: Vision screening has been initiated to detect potential vision problems, paving referral pathways towards a full eye examination. Time-cost-labour practicality challenges of equipment-based vision screening have lingered for decades. Going for the highest sensitivity and specificity or opting for a pragmatic and affordable vision screening program remains a dilemma in public eye health. We aimed to report the development of a new online and equipment-free vision screening called Eye: Questionnairebased Vision Screening (EyeQVS). We also analysed the visual profile of Orang Bateq resided in a remote locality, using findings from EyeQVS, single test vision screening and full eye examination. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Multi-perspective development strategies were employed in designing EyeQVS. The questionnaire items were constructed using the working backward technique, compiling common vision disorders from the literature and face validation using expert panels. Face validation and usability assessment were performed on EyeQVS. The vision screening was carried out using EyeQVS and single test visual acuity screening method. The full eye examination included visual acuity, refraction, binocular vision and ocular health assessment. The visual profile of indigenous people (Orang Bateq) at Kampung Bengoi and Kampung Atok, Jerantut, Pahang was analysed using EyeQVS, single test visual acuity screening method and full eye examination. RESULTS: The performance of EyeQVS was affirmative in both face validation and usability. About 95% of Orang Bateq failed full eye examination, while 55% failed EyeQVS screening. None of them failed single test vision screening. Binocular disorders and dry eye problems were commonly found in Orang Bateq. EyeQVS unearthed more various vision problems compared to the single test vision screening (visual acuity alone) as a screening tool in a remote location. CONCLUSION: EyeQVS can screen for binocular disorders and dry eyes problem commonly found among indigenous people, which might be missed using a single-test visual acuity screening approach. EyeQVS is a practical alternative for vision screening in places where financial or location hinders eye healthcare access.

Association of household language and vision screening among children in the United States.

The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends annual testing in children beginning at 3 years of age to detect vision problems and prevent amblyopia. However, rates of vision testing in children from non-English primary language (NEPL) households are not well delineated. This study analyzed the 2018-2020 National Survey of Children's Health to examine patterns and predictors of vision testing among children from NEPL households. In this nationally representative cohort of 89,697 children 3-17 years of age, 70.9% of children received vision testing during the previous 12 months. Children from non-English-speaking households were less likely to undergo vision testing (64.3% vs 72.0%; aOR [95% CI] = 0.83 [0.72-0.95], P = 0.008). Decreased vision testing among children from NEPL households was driven by lower rates of testing at school (16.1% vs 21.0%; 0.72 [0.57-0.89], P = 0.009) or from an ophthalmologist or optometrist (49.0% vs 54.0%; 0.72 [0.61-0.85], P = 0.0004), whereas children from NEPL households were more likely to receive vision testing at health clinics (14.4% vs 3.1%; 3.25 [2.40-4.39], P < 0.0001). No differences were observed in rates of testing by a pediatrician (41.1% vs 44.0%; 1.05 [0.89-1.23], P = 0.69). Interventions to improve language services and health literacy are warranted to increase rates of vision testing among children from NEPL households.

Detection of significant vision conditions in children using QuickSee wavefront autorefractor.

PURPOSE: This study evaluated the ability of QuickSee to detect children at risk for significant vision conditions (significant refractive error [RE], amblyopia and strabismus). METHODS: Non-cycloplegic refraction (using QuickSee without and with +2 dioptre (D) fogging lenses) and unaided binocular near visual acuity (VA) were measured in 4- to 12-year-old children. Eye examination findings (VA, cover testing and cycloplegic retinoscopy) were used to determine the presence of vision conditions. QuickSee performance was summarised by area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), sensitivity and specificity for various levels of RE. QuickSee referral criteria for each vision condition were chosen to maximise sensitivity at a specificity of approximately 85%-90%. Sensitivity and specificity to detect vision conditions were calculated using multiple criteria. Logistic regression was used to evaluate the benefit of adding near VA (6/12 or worse) for detecting hyperopia. A paired t-test compared QuickSee without and with fogging lenses. RESULTS: The mean age was 8.2 (±2.5) years (n = 174). RE ranged up to 9.25 D myopia, 8 D hyperopia, 5.25 D astigmatism and 3.5 D anisometropia. The testability of the QuickSee was 94.3%. AUC was ≥0.92 (excellent) for each level of RE. For the detection of any RE, sensitivity and specificity were 84.2% and 87.3%, respectively, using modified Orinda criteria and 94.5% and 78.2%, respectively, using the American Academy for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus (AAPOS) guidelines. For the detection of any significant vision condition, the sensitivity and specificity of QuickSee were 81.1% and 87.9%, respectively, using modified Orinda criteria and 93% and 78.6%, respectively, using AAPOS criteria. There was no significant benefit of adding near VA to QuickSee for the detection of hyperopia ≥+2.00 (p = 0.34). There was no significant difference between QuickSee measurements of hyperopic refractive error with and without fogging lenses (difference = -0.09 D; p = 0.51). CONCLUSIONS: QuickSee had high discriminatory power for detecting children with hyperopia, myopia, astigmatism, anisometropia, any significant refractive error or any significant vision condition.

Amblyopia Care Trends Following Widespread Photoscreener Adoption.

Importance: Amblyopia can result in permanent vision loss if not properly treated before age 7 years. In 2017, the US Preventive Services Task Force recommended that vision screening should occur at least once in all children aged 3 to 5 years to detect amblyopia. Objective: To understand trends and factors associated with screening, referral, or diagnosis of amblyopia before and after photoscreening expansion across a relatively large health care system in late 2017. Design, Setting, and Participants: This is a retrospective cohort study of electronic health record data from patients with a well child care visit at approximately age 3 years (ages 2.75-3.25 years) in a relatively large, multispecialty group practice in Northern California and linked census data between 2015 and 2022. Data were extracted and analyzed from October 2022 through August 2023. Exposures: Patient sex, race and ethnicity, immunization records, previous well child care visits, and census-level median household income. Main Outcomes and Measures: Vision screening, pediatric ophthalmology referral, or amblyopia diagnosis, compared using adjusted odds ratios (AORs). Results: The study included 2015-2017 data from 23 246 patients aged 3 years with at least 1 well child care visit (11 206 [48.2%] female) compared with 2018-2022 postexpansion data from 34 281 patients (16 517 [48.2%] female). The screening rate increased from 5.7% (424 of 7505) in 2015 to 72.1% (4578 of 6354) in 2022. The referral rate increased from 17.0% (1279 of 7505) in 2015 to 23.6% (1836 of 7792) in 2018. The diagnosis rate was 2.7% (200 of 7505) in 2015, peaked at 3.4% (263 of 7792) in 2018, and decreased to 1.4% (88 of 6354) in 2022. Compared with White patients, patients who were Asian, Black, or Hispanic were less likely to be screened (Asian: AOR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.72-0.88; Black: AOR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.53-0.96; Hispanic: AOR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.80-0.97). Compared with White patients, patients who were Asian or Hispanic were more likely to be referred (Asian: AOR, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.36-1.62; Hispanic: AOR, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.18-1.48) and were more likely to be diagnosed (Asian: AOR, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.07-1.56; Hispanic: AOR, 1.67; 95% CI, 1.33-2.11). Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, increased availability of photoscreeners was associated with an increase in overall rates of vision screening for children aged 3 years in a relatively large health care system. Given that US rates of visual impairment are predicted to increase, additional targeted interventions would be needed to address remaining disparities in amblyopia care along patient- and clinician-level factors.

Predicting myopic changes in children wearing glasses using the Plusoptix photoscreener.

INTRODUCTION: With high increase in myopia prevalence, we aimed to assess whether Plusoptix_A09 can be used in myopic children over spectacles to predict visual acuity (VA) and myopic refraction changes. METHODS: Myopic children underwent a complete ophthalmological examination. Plusoptix_A09 was performed over spectacles. VA changes, refraction changes and time since previous glasses prescription, were determined. Age, current or past history of amblyopia, presence of strabismus and self-perception of VA changes were registered. RESULTS: In total, 199 patients were included. Spherical power (SP) and spherical equivalent (SE) measured by Plusoptix_A09 over spectacles predicted both VA changes (p < 0.001) and refraction changes (p < 0.001). Values of SP < - 0.06D or SE < - 0.22D indicated a VA decrease (AUC > 0.9, p < 0.01) for sensitivity and specificity of 85.1%, 82.1% and 82.6%, 83.3%, respectively. Age and ophthalmological comorbidities did not influence Plusoptix_A09 measurements (p > 0.05). Plusoptix_A09 over spectacles was a stronger predictor of VA changes when compared to children's self-perception, either in 4-9-year-old patients (p < 0.001 versus p = 0.628) and in 10-18-year-old children (OR < = 0.066 versus OR = 0.190). A decrease in SP and SE of - 0.10D in Plusoptix_A09 predicted a myopia progression of - 0.04D and - 0.05D, respectively. CONCLUSION/RELEVANCE: This study unveiled new features for the Plusoptix, a worldwide available photoscreener used in amblyopia screening. When Plusoptix is performed in children with their glasses on, it can rapidly predict myopia progression. For each decrease of - 0.10D in Plusoptix, a myopia progression of -0.05D is expected. Moreover, Plusoptix is more reliable than children's self-perception of visual acuity changes, making it a useful tool either in primary care or ophthalmology practice.

Capabilities and Limitations of Student-Led Free Vision Screening Programs in the United States.

Purpose: The Consortium of Student-Led Eye Clinics (CSLEC), founded in 2021, administered a comprehensive survey to document the types of services, most common diagnoses, and follow-up care protocols offered by student-led free vision screening programs (SLFVSP) in the United States. Methods: An 81-question institutional review board (IRB)-approved survey was administered to student-led vision screening eye clinics from October 1, 2022 to February 24, 2023. Results: Sixteen SLFVSPs were included in the final analysis, of which 81% (n = 13) conducted variations of fundoscopic examinations and 75% (n = 12) measured intraocular pressure. Cataracts and diabetic retinopathy were reported as the most frequent diagnoses by the majority of SLFVSPs (n = 9, 56%); non-mobile SLFVSPs more commonly reported cataract as a frequent diagnosis (P < 0.05). Most patients screened at participating programs were uninsured or met federal poverty guidelines. Prescription glasses were offered by 56% of the programs (n = 9). SLFVSPs that directly scheduled follow-up appointments reported higher attendance rates (66.5%) than those that only sent referrals (20%). Transportation was the most cited barrier for follow-up appointment attendance. Conclusions: SLFVSPs, one community vision screening initiative subtype, vary significantly in scope and capabilities of identifying vision threatening disease. The follow-up infrastructure is not uniformly robust and represents a key target for improving care delivery to at-risk populations. Translational Relevance: The CSLEC aims to develop a consensus-based standardization for the scope of screening services, offer guidelines for diagnostic criteria, promote real-time data stewardship, and identify means to improve follow-up care mechanisms in member communities.

Gaps in the Vision Screening Pathway for School-Aged US Children.

This cross-sectional study uses a nationally representative survey of the US pediatric population to identify gaps in the vision screening pathway.

Manhattan Vision Screening and Follow-Up Study (NYC-SIGHT): optometric exam improves access and utilization of eye care services.

PURPOSE: To describe the benefits of optometric evaluation for detection of vision-affecting conditions in the context of community-based eye health screenings and identify factors associated with having a recent dilated eye exam. METHODS: Enrolled participants were age 40 and older, living independently in affordable housing developments in New York City. Eye health screening failure and criteria for seeing the on-site study optometrist were defined as visual acuity 20/40 or worse in either eye, intraocular pressure 23-29 mmHg, or an unreadable fundus image. The optometrist conducted a manifest refraction using loose lenses and used a portable slit lamp and ophthalmoscope to perform a non-dilated anterior and posterior segment ocular health evaluation. Demographics, social determinants of health, eye health screening results, and rates of suspected ophthalmic conditions were recorded. To determine factors associated with having a recent dilated eye exam, which was the main outcome for this statistical analysis, a stepwise multivariate logistic regression was performed. RESULTS: A total of 708 participants were screened, 308 attended the optometric exam; mean age 70.7 ± 11.7 [standard deviation (SD)] years. Among this subgroup, 70.1% identified as female, 54.9% self-identified as African American, 39% as Hispanic/Latino, and 26.6% Dominican ethnicity; 78.2% (241/308) had not undergone a dilated eye exam within the last year, 71.4% reported they did not have an eye care provider. Stepwise multivariate logistic regression analysis indicated that participants who self-reported having cataracts (odds ratio (OR) 2.15; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.03-4.47; p = 0.041), self-reported having glaucoma/glaucoma suspect (OR 5.60; 95% CI 2.02-15.43; p = 0.001), or spoke Spanish as their primary language (OR 3.25; 95% CI 1.48-7.11; p = 0.003) had higher odds of having a recent dilated eye exam. CONCLUSIONS: This community-based screening initiative demonstrated the effectiveness of optometric exams in detecting vision-affecting conditions and identified factors associated with having a recent dilated eye exam. Optometrists play a vital role in increasing access to eye care for high-risk, underserved populations. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04271709).

Newborn and infant vision screening in primary care: A clinical review.

PURPOSE: Newborn and infant vision screening is an essential component of the health promotion visit, where the provider screens for ocular risk factors and abnormalities that may cause future impairment or vision loss. Providers may underestimate the importance of screening or find neonatal vision assessments difficult due to poor patient cooperation or time-consuming exams, but the reversibility of vision impairment in infants makes early detection paramount to proper treatment. This article provides a clinical review of evidence-based, practical guidance to providers who care for infants from birth through 6 months of age in the primary care setting. CONCLUSIONS: The comprehensive eye exam in infants should include a thorough history and physical examination of eye structures, visual acuity, evaluation of extraocular movements and alignment, and assessment of the red reflex. Recommended exam maneuvers differ with age as visual acuity improves and development advances through infancy. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Early detection of ocular pathology is critical to avoid permanent vision loss, serious morbidity, and even mortality. The seemingly complex vision screening exam can be completed with little to no cooperation from the patient when a competent pediatric healthcare provider prioritizes opportunistic exam maneuvers. The opportunistic exam allows providers to maximize efficiency while maintaining thorough technique during vision exams and screenings.

Status of Vision and Eye Care Among Patients in Rehabilitation Hospital Units: A Cross-Sectional Study.

OBJECTIVES: The prevalence of vision disorders is high among geriatric and hospital inpatient populations, yet they often go undetected, resulting in consequences such as falls or prolonged recovery time. A needs assessment study was conducted to investigate levels of vision and the potential prevalence of unmanaged/undiagnosed ocular disorders among adult inpatients in a hospital-based rehabilitation unit. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: Inpatient rehabilitation units of an acute care hospital system in Ontario, Canada. Adults (n = 112) in a hospital inpatient rehabilitation unit participated from October 2018 to February 2019. METHODS: Participants were surveyed regarding their demographic, ocular, and medical data and spectacle wear. Visual acuity, contrast sensitivity, visual fields, and stereoacuity plus the spectacle condition were directly assessed. RESULTS: The majority (75%) were found to have reduced habitual vision while in hospital. Nearly 60% of participants reported at least some difficulty reading a newspaper or distinguishing a face or were "not happy with their vision." This was despite 80% of participants reporting that they had an eye care practitioner and 70% that they had an eye examination within the last 2 years. More than half (51.8%) of the participants received the recommendation to follow up with their eye care practitioner on discharge from the hospital. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Reduced vision and vision disorders has a high prevalence among hospital patients in rehabilitation units and should be evaluated at or soon after hospital intake. By incorporating vision screening tools, necessary precautions may be taken to avoid possible falls and promote recovery.

Visual Acuity Screening in North Indian Schools: Testing Accuracy and Cost of Alternate Screening Models.

PURPOSE: Our study compares the sensitivity, specificity and cost of visual acuity screening as performed by all class teachers (ACTs), selected teachers (STs) and vision technicians (VTs) in north Indian schools. METHODS: Prospective cluster randomized control studies are conducted in schools in a rural block and an urban-slum of north India. Consenting schools, with a minimum of 800 students aged 6 to 17 years, within a defined study region in both locations, were randomised into three arms: ACTs, STs or VTs. Teachers were trained to test visual acuity. Reduced vision was defined as unable to read equivalent of 20/30. Optometrists, who were masked to results of initial screening, examined all children. Costs were measured for all three arms. RESULTS: The number of students screened were 3410 in 9 ACT schools, 2999 in 9 ST schools and 3071 in 11 VT schools. Vision deficit was found in 214 (6.3%), 349 (11.6%) and 207 (6.7%), (p < .001) children in the ACT, ST and VT arms, respectively. The positive predictive value of VT screening for vision deficit (81.2%) was significantly higher than that of ACTs (42.5%) and STs (30.1%), (p < .001). VTs had significantly higher sensitivity of 93.3% and specificity of 98.7%, compared to ACTs (36.0% and 96.1%) and STs (44.3% and 91.2%). The cost of screening children with actual visual deficit by ACTs, STs and VTs, was found to be $9.35, $5.79 and $2.82 per child, respectively. CONCLUSION: Greater accuracy and lower cost favours school visual acuity screening by visual technicians in this setting, when they are available.

Manhattan Vision Screening and Follow-Up Study (NYC-SIGHT): Subanalysis of Referral to Ophthalmology.

PURPOSE: The Manhattan Vision Screening and Follow-up Study aims to provide access to eye care for underserved populations, detect native rates of ocular pathology, and refer participants with eye disease to ophthalmology. This subanalysis describes the reasons for referral to ophthalmology and identifies risk factors associated with being referred. METHODS: Enrolled participants were aged ≥40 years, living independently in public housing developments and able to provide consent for eye health screenings. Those with habitual visual acuity 20/40 or worse, intraocular pressure (IOP) 23-29 mmHg, or an unreadable fundus image failed and were scheduled with the on-site optometrist. The optometric exam determined whether further referral to ophthalmology for a clinic exam was warranted. Those with an abnormal image or IOP ≥30 mmHg were referred directly to ophthalmology. Main outcome was factors associated with referral to ophthalmology. RESULTS: A total of 708 individuals completed the eye health screening over 15 months. A total of 468 participants were referred to ophthalmology (250 had an abnormal image and 218 were referred by the optometrist). Those referred were predominantly older adults (mean age 70.0 ± 11.4 years), female (66.7%), African American (55.1%) and Hispanic (39.5%). Seventy percent of participants had not had a recent eye exam. Stepwise multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that participants with pre-existing glaucoma (OR 3.14, 95% CI 1.62 to 6.08, p = 0.001), an IOP ≥23 mmHg (OR 5.04, 95% 1.91 to 13.28, p = 0.001), or vision impairment (mild) (OR 2.51, 95% CI 1.68 to 3.77, p = 0.001) had significantly higher odds of being referred to ophthalmology. CONCLUSION: This targeted community-based study in Upper Manhattan provided access to eye care and detected a significant amount of ocular pathology requiring referral to ophthalmology in this high-risk population.

Hyperopia in schoolchildren: Investigating the impact on vision and determining appropriate methods for screening.

INTRODUCTION: Hyperopia is associated with reduced vision and educational outcomes in schoolchildren. This study explored the impact of clinically significant hyperopia (≥+2.00 D) on visual function in schoolchildren and compared the ability of different screening tests (alone and in combination) to detect this level of hyperopia. METHODS: Vision testing including monocular logMAR visual acuity (VA) measured to threshold (distance [DVA], near [NVA] and DVA through a plus lens [+2.50 D]), stereoacuity and cycloplegic autorefraction (tropicamide 1%) were undertaken on 263 schoolchildren (mean age: 11.76 years ± 3.38) in Queensland, Australia. Vision measures were compared between children with clinically significant hyperopia in at least one meridian (≥+2.00 D) and emmetropia/low hyperopia (>0.00 and <+2.00 D). Receiver operating curve (ROC) analysis was performed to identify optimal pass/fail criteria for each test and the diagnostic accuracy of individual and combinations of tests. RESULTS: Thirty-two children had clinically significant hyperopia and 225 had emmetropia/low hyperopia. DVA and NVA were worse (p < 0.01), while the difference in DVA through a plus lens was less in children with clinically significant hyperopia (p < 0.01). ROC analysis for individual tests resulted in areas under the curve (AUCs) ranging from 0.65 to 0.85. Combining screening tests revealed that failing one or more of the following tests was most effective for detecting hyperopia: DVA, NVA and difference in DVA through a plus lens, resulting in a sensitivity and specificity of 72% and 81%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Significant differences in visual function existed between schoolchildren with clinically significant hyperopia and emmetropia/low hyperopia. Combining measures of DVA and NVA and the difference in DVA through a plus lens demonstrated good discriminative ability for detecting clinically significant hyperopia in this population.

Predictors of Clinic Attendance After Community-Based Vision Screening.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to analyze appointment attendance rates and patient characteristics associated with follow-up adherence after referral from a community vision screening event. Methods: A retrospective chart review of patients who attended a 2021 or 2022 community vision screening event and were referred to the university clinic for further care. Appointments were offered without charge and scheduled at the event. Associations between patients' clinical and demographic characteristics and appointment attendance were assessed by binary logistical regression. Results: A total of 935 patients attended the annual community vision screening events held in 2021 and 2022. Of these patients, 117 (13%) were referred to the clinic for follow-up, of whom 56 (48%) attended their scheduled follow-up appointment. The most common reasons for clinic referral included cataract (12, 10%), diabetic retinopathy (11, 9%), glaucoma (9, 8%), and challenging refractive error (9, 8%). Health insurance and male gender were predictors of follow-up (odds ratio [OR] = 3.08, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.19-7.99, P = 0.021 and OR = 2.72, 95% CI = 1.10-6.61, P = 0.035, respectively). Conclusions: Half of the referred patients followed up after vision screening. Providing appointment scheduling at the point of care and offering follow-up care at no cost may help to promote clinic follow-up, but further assessment of barriers to regular eye care is warranted. Health insurance most strongly predicted successful clinic attendance. Translational Relevance: This study emphasizes the enduring impact of health insurance status as a barrier to accessing comprehensive vision care.

Design and delivery of the Refractive Errors Among Children (REACH) school-based eye health programme in India.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Optimisation of vision screening programmes can result the detection of refractive anomalies in a high proportion of school children. BACKGROUND: The Refractive Errors Among Children (REACH) programme aims to optimise outcomes of school-based vision screening in India by collaborating with hospitals and monitoring eye care throughout school attendance. METHODS: REACH delivers school vision screening using pocket vision screeners (cards presenting rows of seven 0.2 logMAR Sloan letters at a 3 m viewing distance) in five states across India. Children who fail screening are referred for detailed evaluation including refraction, those requiring cycloplegic refraction are referred to partner hospitals. Spectacles are dispensed as needed and compliance is assessed. All data are recorded electronically. RESULTS: Out of 2,240,805 children aged 5 to 18 (mean 11.5; SD ±3.3) years, 2,024,053 have undergone REACH screening in 10,309 schools predominantly in rural locations (78.7%) and government-funded (76%). Of those screened, 174,706 (8.6%) underwent detailed evaluation. A higher proportion of children in private or urban schools (11.8% and 10.4% respectively) were referred for detailed evaluation than those in government-funded or rural schools (5.9% and 7.2%, respectively; p < 0.001). The proportion referred for detailed evaluation differed by state (p < 0.001), from 4.0% in West Bengal to 14.4% in Kerala. CONCLUSION: The REACH programme screened a high proportion of school children, providing further care and follow-up to optimise visual outcomes.