Cost-effectiveness of Universal School- and Community-Based Vision Testing Strategies to Detect Amblyopia in Children in Ontario, Canada.

Importance: Screening for amblyopia in primary care visits is recommended for young children, yet screening rates are poor. Although the prevalence of amblyopia is low (3%-5%) among young children, universal screening in schools and mandatory optometric examinations may improve vision care, but the cost-effectiveness of these vision testing strategies compared with the standard in primary care is unknown. Objective: To evaluate the relative cost-effectiveness of universal school screening and mandated optometric examinations compared with standard care vision screening in primary care visits in Toronto, Canada, with the aim of detecting and facilitating treatment of amblyopia and amblyopia risk factors from the Ontario government's perspective. Design, Setting, and Participants: An economic evaluation was conducted from July 2019 to May 2021 using a Markov model to compare 15-year costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) between school screening and optometric examination compared with primary care screening in Toronto, Canada. Parameters were derived from published literature, the Ontario Schedule of Benefits and Fees, and the Kindergarten Vision Testing Program. A hypothetical cohort of 25 000 children aged 3 to 5 years was simulated. It was assumed that children in the cohort had irreversible vision impairment if not diagnosed by an optometrist. In addition, incremental costs and outcomes of 0 were adjusted to favor the reference strategy. Vision testing programs were designed to detect amblyopia and amblyopia risk factors. Main Outcomes and Measures: For each strategy, the mean costs per child included the costs of screening, optometric examinations, and treatment. The mean health benefits (QALYs) gained were informed by the presence of vision impairment and the benefits of treatment. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated for each alternative strategy relative to the standard primary care screening strategy as the additional cost required to achieve an additional QALY at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50 000 Canadian dollars (CAD) ($37 690) per QALY gained. Results: School screening relative to primary care screening yielded cost savings of CAD $84.09 (95% CI, CAD $82.22-$85.95) (US $63.38 [95% CI, US $61.97-$64.78]) per child and an incremental gain of 0.0004 (95% CI, -0.0047 to 0.0055) QALYs per child. Optometric examinations relative to primary care screening yielded cost savings of CAD $74.47 (95% CI, CAD $72.90-$76.03) (US $56.13 [95% CI, $54.95-$57.30]) per child and an incremental gain of 0.0508 (95% CI, 0.0455-0.0561) QALYs per child. At a willingness-to-pay threshold of CAD $50 000 (US $37 690) per QALY gained, school screening and optometric examinations were cost-effective relative to primary care screening in only 20% and 29% of iterations, respectively. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, because amblyopia prevalence is low among young children and most children in the hypothetical cohort had healthy vision, universal school screening and optometric examinations were not cost-effective relative to primary care screening for detecting amblyopia in young children in Toronto, Canada. The mean added health benefits of school screening and optometric examinations compared with primary care screening did not warrant the resources used.

Socioeconomic Status and Vision Care Services in Ontario, Canada: A Population-Based Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVE: To test the association of material deprivation and the utilization of vision care services for young children. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a population-based, repeated measures cohort study using linked health and administrative datasets. All children born in Ontario in 2010 eligible for provincial health insurance were followed from birth until their seventh birthday. The main exposure was neighborhood-level material deprivation quintile, a proxy for socioeconomic status. The primary outcome was receipt of a comprehensive eye examination (not to include a vision screening) by age 7 years from an eye care professional, or family physician. RESULTS: Of 128 091 children included, female children represented 48.7% of the cohort, 74.4% lived in major urban areas, and 16.2% lived in families receiving income assistance. Only 65% (n = 82 833) had at least 1 comprehensive eye examination, with the lowest uptake (56.9%; n = 31 911) in the most deprived and the highest uptake (70.5%; n =19 860) in the least deprived quintiles. After adjusting for clinical and demographic variables, children living in the least materially deprived quintile had a higher odds of receiving a comprehensive eye examination (aOR 1.43; 95% CI 1.36, 1.51) compared with children in the most materially deprived areas. CONCLUSIONS: Uptake of comprehensive eye examinations is poor, especially for children living in the most materially deprived neighborhoods. Strategies to improve uptake and reduce inequities are warranted.

Access to Vision Services by Vulnerable Populations in Canada: A Scoping Review.

Vision impairment has a significant impact on quality of life. Seventy percent of existing vision impairment in Canada is estimated to be correctable with prescription glasses. The sizeable proportion of correctable vision impairment appears related to the barriers to access to vision care in Canada. The objective of this scoping review is to determine gaps in the understanding of barriers to accessing vision care for vulnerable populations in Canada. The Arksey and O'Malley methodological framework was adopted. Studies published in English between 2005 and September 2017 on access to primary vision care by vulnerable populations in Canada were reviewed. Electronic databases used included Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE, SCOPUS, ProQuest, and CINAHL. The Behavioural Model of Health Services Use was used to elucidate gaps in the literature. To develop relevant policies around vision care, efforts should be made to assess all dimensions of access for vulnerable populations across Canada.

Community vision screening in preschoolers: initial experience using the Plusoptix S12C automated photoscreening camera.

OBJECTIVE: Amblyopia is the leading cause of monocular vision impairment in children. Early intervention is critical to prevent permanent vision impairment. Preschool vision screening programs in Canada are limited. This study reports the initial results of a community-wide vision screening program for preschoolers using the Plusoptix S12C Photoscreener (Plusoptix Inc, Nuremburg, Germany). DESIGN: Cross-sectional. PARTICIPANTS: For this study, 1443 children aged 18-59 months were recruited and screened in various community settings in London, Ontario. METHODS: Participants were screened with the Plusoptix S12C device from September 2015 to May 2016. Data were analyzed for percentage of children referred for amblyogenic risk factors using the Arnold 2012 referral criteria. Referral, inconclusive results, follow-up rate, and positive predictive value were reported. RESULTS: Data from 1321 children were analyzed. Mean age of children meeting the inclusion criteria was 34.1 ± 9.6 (18-58) months. One hundred and nineteen children were referred to an optometrist for a comprehensive eye exam; 39 (3.0%) were inconclusive screens. The referral rate for children detected with amblyogenic risk factors was 6.1%. Forty (50.0%) children were documented as complying with the follow-up examination. The positive predictive value was 81.8%. CONCLUSIONS: Our community-wide vision screening program identified in a timely, manner, 80 preschoolers with amblyogenic risk factors previously unknown to be present. Results identified children with amblyogenic risk factors that may have gone undetected. This program could serve as a model for consideration by policy makers.