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.

Correction: Effect of Door-to-Door Screening and Awareness Generation Activities in the Catchment Areas of Vision Centers on Service Use: Protocol for a Randomized Experimental Study.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.2196/31951.].

Effect of Door-to-Door Screening and Awareness Generation Activities in the Catchment Areas of Vision Centers on Service Use: Protocol for a Randomized Experimental Study.

BACKGROUND: A vision center (VC) is a significant eye care service model to strengthen primary eye care services. VCs have been set up at the block level, covering a population of 150,000-250,000 in rural areas in North India. Inadequate use by rural communities is a major challenge to sustainability of these VCs. This not only reduces the community's vision improvement potential but also impacts self-sustainability and limits expansion of services in rural areas. The current literature reports a lack of awareness regarding eye diseases and the need for care, social stigmas, low priority being given to eye problems, prevailing gender discrimination, cost, and dependence on caregivers as factors preventing the use of primary eye care. OBJECTIVE: Our organization is planning an awareness-cum-engagement intervention-door-to-door basic eye checkup and visual acuity screening in VCs coverage areas-to connect with the community and improve the rational use of VCs. METHODS: In this randomized, parallel-group experimental study, we will select 2 VCs each for the intervention arm and the control arm from among poor, low-performing VCs (ie, walk-in of ≤10 patients/day) in our 2 operational regions (Vrindavan, Mathura District, and Mohammadi, Kheri District) of Uttar Pradesh. Intervention will include door-to-door screening and awareness generation in 8-12 villages surrounding the VCs, and control VCs will follow existing practices of awareness generation through community activities and health talks. Data will be collected from each VC for 4 months of intervention. Primary outcomes will be an increase in the number of walk-in patients, spectacle advise and uptake, referral and uptake for cataract and specialty surgery, and operational expenses. Secondary outcomes will be uptake of refraction correction and referrals for cataract and other eye conditions. Differences in the number of walk-in patients, referrals, uptake of services, and cost involved will be analyzed. RESULTS: Background work involved planning of interventions and selection of VCs has been completed. Participant recruitment has begun and is currently in progress. CONCLUSIONS: Through this study, we will analyze whether our door-to-door intervention is effective in increasing the number of visits to a VC and, thus, overall sustainability. We will also study the cost-effectiveness of this intervention to recommend its scalability. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04800718; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04800718. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/31951.