Randomised comparison of three tools for improving compliance with occlusion therapy: an educational cartoon story, a reward calendar, and an information leaflet for parents.

BACKGROUND: We previously demonstrated that compliance with occlusion therapy for amblyopia was improved by the use of an educational programme, especially in children of parents of foreign origin and who spoke Dutch poorly. The programme consisted of: (i) a cartoon story for amblyopic children that explained without words why they should patch, (ii) a calendar with reward stickers, and (iii) an information leaflet for parents. In the current study, we assessed the individual effect of each component on compliance. METHODS: We recruited 120 3- to 6-year-old children who lived in a low socio-economic status (SES) area in The Hague and were starting occlusion therapy for the first time. They were randomised to receive one of the components (three intervention groups), or a picture to colour (control group). The randomisation was blinded for treating orthoptist and researcher. Compliance was measured electronically using the Occlusion Dose Monitor (ODM). Primary outcome was percentage of compliance (actual/prescribed occlusion time). Secondary outcome was absolute occlusion hours per day. Parental fluency in Dutch was rated on a five-point scale. RESULTS: Compliance could be measured electronically in 88 of the 120 children; in 32 others, it failed for various reasons. Parental fluency in Dutch was moderate or worse in 36.4 % (p = 0.327). Average compliance was 55 % standard deviation (SD) 40 (n = 18) in the control group, 89 % SD 25 in the group receiving the educational cartoon (n = 25, P = 0.002 compared with control group), 67 % SD 33 (n = 24, P = 0.301) in the reward-calendar group and 73 % SD 40 (n = 21, P = 0.119) in the parent-information-leaflet group. On average, children in the control group occluded 1:46 SD1:19 hours/day, 2:33 SD 1:18 hours/day in the group receiving the educational cartoon, 1:59 SD 1:13 hours/day in the reward-calendar group and 2:18 SD 1:13 hours/day in the parent-information-leaflet group. No child who received the cartoon story occluded less than 1 hour per day, against seven in the reward-calendar group, five in the parent-information-leaflet group and five in the control group. CONCLUSIONS: Although all three components of the programme improved compliance with occlusion therapy in children in low-SES areas, the educational cartoon had the strongest effect, as it explained without words to a 4- to 5-year-old child why it should wear the eye patch.

Implementation of an Educational Cartoon ("the Patchbook") and Other Compliance-Enhancing Measures by Orthoptists in Occlusion Treatment of Amblyopia.

PURPOSE: This implementation study evaluated orthoptists' use of an educational cartoon ("the Patchbook") and other measures to improve compliance with occlusion therapy for amblyopia. METHODS: Participating orthoptists provided standard orthoptic care for one year, adding the Patchbook in the second year. They attended courses on compliance and intercultural communication by communication skills training. Many other compliance-enhancing measures were initiated. Orthoptists' awareness, attitude, and activities regarding noncompliance were assessed through interviews, questionnaires, and observations. Their use of the Patchbook was measured. The study was performed in low socio-economic status (SES) areas and in other areas in the Netherlands. It was attempted to integrate education on compliance into basic and continuing orthoptic training. RESULTS: The Patchbook was used by all 9 orthoptists who participated in low-SES areas and 17 of 23 orthoptists in other areas. Courses changed awareness and attitude about compliance, but this was not sustained. Although orthoptists estimated compliance during patching at 70%, three-quarters never suspected noncompliance during a full day of observation in any of their patients. Explanations to parents who spoke Dutch poorly were short. In the second year, explanations to children were longer. Implementation of all 7 additional compliance-enhancing measures failed. Education on compliance was not integrated into orthoptists' training. CONCLUSION: Almost all orthoptists used the Patchbook and, as another study demonstrated, it proved to be very effective, especially in low-SES areas. Duration of explanation was inversely proportional to parents' fluency in Dutch. Noncompliance was rarely suspected by orthoptists. Although 7 additional compliance-enhancing measures had been conceived and planned with the best intentions, they were not realized. These required extra, unpaid time from the orthoptists, which is especially scarce in hospitals in low-SES areas where the educational cartoon is most needed.

Effectiveness of screening for amblyopia and other eye disorders in a prospective birth cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To establish whether the current vision screening practice in the Netherlands is effective in preventing permanent visual loss and to estimate the sensitivity of the programme. SETTINGS: In the Netherlands, all children are invited for preverbal (1, 3, 6-9 and 14-24 months) and preschool (36, 45, and 60-72 months) vision screening. Screening attendance is high, but the effectiveness in reducing amblyopia is unknown. METHODS: In a 7-year cohort study, 4624 children born in the city of Rotterdam between 16 September 1996 and 15 May 1997 were followed through all routine vision screening examinations. At age seven, visual acuity (VA) of children still living in Rotterdam was assessed by study orthoptists. In case of VA > 0.1 logMAR in one or both eyes, two or more logMAR lines of interocular difference or eye disorders like strabismus, children underwent a more intensive eye examination. RESULTS: Attendance at the 9-month screening was 89%, decreasing to about 75% at later examinations. Of preverbal tests, 2.5% were positive, and of preschool tests, 10%. In total, 19% of children had a positive vision screening test at least once. Amblyopia prevalence was 3.4%. Sensitivity of the vision screening programme was 73% and specificity 83%. At age seven, 0.7-1.2% (confirmed vs final exam) of the children had a VA > 0.3 logMAR in the worse eye compared with 2-3.9% (in literature) reported prevalence in non-screening situations. Children who were less frequently screened had a higher chance of poor vision (>0.3 logMAR) at age seven. CONCLUSION: The Dutch child vision screening programme may reduce the risk of persistent amblyopia (VA > 0.3 logMAR) at age seven by more than half.

How Dutch orthoptists deal with noncompliance with occlusion therapy for amblyopia.

BACKGROUND: We previously found that compliance with occlusion therapy for amblyopia is poor, especially among children of non-native parents who spoke Dutch poorly and who were low educated. We investigated conception, awareness, attitude, and actions to deal with noncompliance among Dutch orthoptists. METHODS: Orthoptists working in non-native, low socioeconomic status (SES) areas and a selection of orthoptists working elsewhere in the Netherlands were studied. They were observed in their practice, received a structured questionnaire, and underwent a semi-structured interview. Finally, a short survey was sent to all working orthoptists in the Netherlands. RESULTS: Nine orthoptists working in non-native, low-SES areas and 23 working elsewhere in the Netherlands participated. One hundred and fifty-one orthoptists returned the short survey. Major discrepancies existed in conception, awareness, and attitude. Opinions differed on what should be defined as noncompliance and on what causes noncompliance. Some orthoptists found noncompliance annoying, unpleasant, and hard to imagine, others were more understanding. Many pitied the noncompliant child. Almost all thought that the success of occlusion therapy lies both with the parents and the orthoptist, but one third thought that noncompliance was not solely their responsibility. Patients' compliance was estimated at 69.3% in non-native, low-SES areas (electronically, 52% had been measured), at 74.1% by the other 23 orthoptists, and at 73.8% in the short survey. Actions to improve compliance were diverse; some increased occlusion hours whereas others decreased them. In non-native, low-SES areas, 22% spoke Dutch moderately to none; the allotted time for a patient's first visit was 21'; the time spent on explaining to the parents was 2'30" and to the child 10". In practices of the other 23 orthoptists, 6% spoke Dutch moderately to none (P<0.0001), the time for a patient's first visit was 27'24" (P=0.47), and the periods spent explaining were 2'51" (P=0.59) and 26" (P=0.17), respectively. CONCLUSION: Conception, awareness, attitude, and actions to deal with noncompliance varied among orthoptists. In non-native, low-SES areas, time spent on explanation was shorter, despite a lower fluency in Dutch among the parents.