Evaluation of a Pilot Protocol for Detecting Infant Hyperopia.

SIGNIFICANCE: Highly hyperopic children are at greater risk for developing conditions such as strabismus, amblyopia, and early literacy and reading problems. High hyperopia is a common finding in infants in a pediatric medical practice, and early detection can be done effectively in that setting with tropicamide autorefraction. PURPOSE: This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of a pilot screening program to detect high hyperopia in 2-month-old infants in a pediatric medical practice in Columbus, Ohio. METHODS: Cycloplegic refractive error (1% tropicamide) was measured by retinoscopy and autorefraction with the Welch Allyn SureSight (Welch Allyn/Hillrom, Skaneateles Falls, NY) in 473 infants (55.4% female) who were undergoing their 2-month well-baby visit at their pediatrician's medical practice. Cycloplegic retinoscopy (1% cyclopentolate) was repeated at a subsequent visit in 35 infants with ≥+5.00 D hyperopia in the most hyperopic meridian during the screening. RESULTS: Twenty-eight infants (5.9%) had high hyperopia (spherical equivalent, ≥+5.00 D), and 61 (12.9%) had high hyperopia (≥+5.00 D in at least one meridian of at least one eye) by retinoscopy with 1% tropicamide. The mean ± standard deviation spherical equivalent tropicamide cycloplegic refractive error measured with retinoscopy was +2.54 ± 1.54 D (range, -3.25 to +7.00 D) and with SureSight was +2.29 ± 1.64 D (range, -2.90 to +7.53 D). Retinoscopy done using 1% cyclopentolate was 0.44 ± 0.54 D more hyperopic in spherical equivalent than with 1% tropicamide ( P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: High hyperopia was a common finding in 2-month-old infants in a pediatric medical setting that could be detected effectively by cycloplegic autorefraction using tropicamide. Greater cooperation between pediatric primary vision and medical care could lead to effective vision screenings designed to detect high hyperopia in infants.

Prescribing patterns for paediatric hyperopia among paediatric eye care providers.

PURPOSE: To survey paediatric eye care providers to identify current patterns of prescribing for hyperopia. METHODS: Paediatric eye care providers were invited, via email, to participate in a survey to evaluate current age-based refractive error prescribing practices. Questions were designed to determine which factors may influence the survey participant's prescribing pattern (e.g., patient's age, magnitude of hyperopia, patient's symptoms, heterophoria and stereopsis) and if the providers were to prescribe, how much hyperopic correction would they prescribe (e.g., full or partial prescription). The response distributions by profession (optometry and ophthalmology) were compared using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov cumulative distribution function test. RESULTS: Responses were submitted by 738 participants regarding how they prescribe for their hyperopic patients. Most providers within each profession considered similar clinical factors when prescribing. The percentages of optometrists and ophthalmologists who reported considering the factor often differed significantly. Factors considered similarly by both optometrists and ophthalmologists were the presence of symptoms (98.0%, p = 0.14), presence of astigmatism and/or anisometropia (97.5%, p = 0.06) and the possibility of teasing (8.3%, p = 0.49). A wide range of prescribing was observed within each profession, with some providers reporting that they would prescribe for low levels of hyperopia while others reported that they would never prescribe. When prescribing for bilateral hyperopia in children with age-normal visual acuity and no manifest deviation or symptoms, the threshold for prescribing decreased with age for both professions, with ophthalmologists typically prescribing 1.5-2 D less than optometrists. The threshold for prescribing also decreased for both optometrists and ophthalmologists when children had associated clinical factors (e.g., esophoria or reduced near visual function). Optometrists and ophthalmologists most commonly prescribed based on cycloplegic refraction, although optometrists most commonly prescribed based on both the manifest and cycloplegic refraction for children ≥7 years. CONCLUSION: Prescribing patterns for paediatric hyperopia vary significantly among eye care providers.

Does coexisting accommodative dysfunction impact clinical convergence measures, symptoms and treatment success for symptomatic convergence insufficiency in children?

PURPOSE: To determine whether coexisting accommodative dysfunction in children with symptomatic convergence insufficiency (CI) impacts presenting clinical convergence measures, symptoms and treatment success for CI. METHODS: Secondary data analyses of monocular accommodative amplitude (AA; push-up method), monocular accommodative facility (AF; ±2.00 D lens flippers) and symptoms (CI Symptom Survey [CISS]) in children with symptomatic CI from the Convergence Insufficiency Treatment Trial (N = 218) and CITT-Attention and Reading Trial (N = 302) were conducted. Decreased AA was defined as more than 2D below the minimum expected amplitude for age (15 - » age); those with AA < 5 D were excluded. Decreased AF was defined as <6 cycles per minute. Mean near point of convergence (NPC), near positive fusional vergence (PFV) and symptoms (CISS) were compared between those with and without accommodative dysfunction using analysis of variance and independent samples t-testing. Logistic regression was used to compare the effect of baseline accommodative function on treatment success [defined using a composite of improvements in: (1) clinical convergence measures and symptoms (NPC, PFV and CISS scores) or (2) solely convergence measures (NPC and PFV)]. RESULTS: Accommodative dysfunction was common in children with symptomatic CI (55% had decreased AA; 34% had decreased AF). NPC was significantly worse in those with decreased AA (mean difference = 6.1 cm; p < 0.001). Mean baseline CISS scores were slightly worse in children with coexisting accommodative dysfunction (decreased AA or AF) (30.2 points) than those with normal accommodation (26.9 points) (mean difference = 3.3 points; p < 0.001). Neither baseline accommodative function (p ≥ 0.12 for all) nor interaction of baseline accommodative function and treatment (p ≥ 0.50) were related to treatment success based on the two composite outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: A coexisting accommodative dysfunction in children with symptomatic CI is associated with worse NPC, but it does not impact the severity of symptoms in a clinically meaningful way. Concurrent accommodative dysfunction does not impact treatment response for CI.

Repeatability and Validity of Peripheral Refraction with Two Different Autorefractors.

SIGNIFICANCE: The Welch Allyn SureSight (Welch Allyn, Skaneateles Falls, NY) and Plusoptix PowerRefractor (Plusoptix, Nuremberg, Germany) are often used with infants, but little is known about the repeatability and validity of their peripheral refractive error measurements. Selecting the best instrument will support future refractive error and emmetropization studies. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to determine the validity and repeatability of peripheral refractive error measurements and peripheral refraction profiles measured with the Welch Allyn SureSight and Plusoptix PowerRefractor compared with the criterion standard Grand Seiko WR-5100K (Grand Seiko Co., Hiroshima, Japan). METHODS: Cycloplegic (tropicamide 1%) autorefraction was measured in the right eyes of 21 adult subjects (31.4 ± 10.4 years) with the three instruments in randomized order on two separate visits, at least 24 hours apart, centrally, and at 30 and 20° temporal and nasal gaze. RESULTS: The SureSight measurements were within 0.24 D and not significantly different from the Grand Seiko WR-5100K in any gaze (P < .65), whereas the PowerRefractor measurements were more myopic by as much as -0.97 D and significantly different in four of the five gaze directions (P < .04). The 95% limits of agreement between occasions by gaze ranged from ±0.38 to ±0.61 D for the SureSight, similar to or slightly better than the WR-5100K (±0.31 to ±1.51 D) and the PowerRefractor (±0.72 to ±1.71 D). There were no significant differences between visits for any instrument in any gaze (P < .94). The repeatability of the SureSight was also better than that for the Grand Seiko when peripheral refraction was represented by quadratic fits to the data. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that the Welch Allyn SureSight is the most suitable portable autorefractor to use to monitor peripheral autorefraction based on better repeatability between occasions and better validity compared with the criterion standard Grand Seiko WR-5100K.

Cytochrome P450 1 genes in early deuterostomes (tunicates and sea urchins) and vertebrates (chicken and frog): origin and diversification of the CYP1 gene family.

Cytochrome P450 family 1 (CYP1) proteins are important in a large number of toxicological processes. CYP1A and CYP1B genes are well known in mammals, but the evolutionary history of the CYP1 family as a whole is obscure; that history may provide insight into endogenous functions of CYP1 enzymes. Here, we identify CYP1-like genes in early deuterostomes (tunicates and echinoderms), and several new CYP1 genes in vertebrates (chicken, Gallus gallus and frog, Xenopus tropicalis). Profile hidden Markov models (HMMs) generated from vertebrate CYP1A and CYP1B protein sequences were used to identify 5 potential CYP1 homologs in the tunicate Ciona intestinalis genome. The C. intestinalis genes were cloned and sequenced, confirming the predicted sequences. Orthologs of 4 of these genes were found in the Ciona savignyi genome. Bayesian phylogenetic analyses group the tunicate genes in the CYP1 family, provisionally in 2 new subfamilies, CYP1E and CYP1F, which fall in the CYP1A and CYP1B/1C clades. Bayesian and maximum likelihood analyses predict functional divergence between the tunicate and vertebrate CYP1s, and regions within CYP substrate recognition sites were found to differ significantly in position-specific substitution rates between tunicates and vertebrates. Subsequently, 10 CYP1-like genes were found in the echinoderm Strongylocentrotus purpuratus (sea urchin) genome. Several of the tunicate and echinoderm CYP1-like genes are expressed during development. Canonical xenobiotic response elements are present in the upstream genomic sequences of most tunicate and sea urchin CYP1s, and both groups are predicted to possess an aryl hydrocarbon receptor (AHR), suggesting possible regulatory linkage of AHR and these CYPs. The CYP1 family has undergone multiple rounds of gene duplication followed by functional divergence, with at least one gene lost in mammals. This study provides new insight into the origin and evolution of CYP1 genes.