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.

Impact of ophthalmic clinical service use in mitigating myopia onset and progression in preschool children: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Although school screenings identify children with vision problems and issue referrals for medical treatment at an ophthalmic hospital, the effectiveness of this approach remains unverified. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the impact of ophthalmic clinical services on the onset and progression of myopia in preschool children identified with vision impairment. METHODS: Using data from the Shanghai Child and Adolescent Large-scale Eye Study (SCALE), this retrospective cohort study evaluated the visual development of children from three districts-Jing'an, Minhang, and Pudong-which are representative of geographic diversity and economic disparity in Shanghai's 17 districts. Initially, in 2015, the study encompassed 14,572 children aged 4-6 years, of whom 5,917 needed a referral. Our cohort consisted of 5,511 children who had two or more vision screenings and complete personal information over the follow-up period from January 2015 to December 2020. We divided these children into two groups based on their initial spherical equivalent (SE): a High-risk group (SE > -0.5 D) and a Myopia group (SE ≤ -0.5 D). Within each of these groups, we further categorized children into Never, Tardily, and Timely groups based on their referral compliance to compare the differences in the occurrence and progression of myopia. Cox proportional models were applied to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) for myopia incidence per person-years of follow-up in High-risk group. Generalized additive models(GAM) was used to calculating the progression for annual spherical equivalent changes in all children. RESULTS: Of the 5,511 preschool children (mean age, 5.25 years; 52.24% male) who received a referral recommendation, 1,327 (24.08%) sought clinical services at an ophthalmic hospital. After six years of follow-up, 65.53% of children developed myopia. The six-year cumulative incidence of myopia in the Never, Tardily, and Timely groups was 64.76%, 69.31%, and 57.14%, respectively. These percentages corresponded to hazard ratios (HRs) of 1.31 (95% CI, 1.10-1.55) for the Tardily group and 0.55 (95% CI, 0.33-0.93) for the Timely group, compared with the Never group. The HRs were adjusted for age, sex, and SE at study entry. Interestingly, the Timely group showed significantly less SE progression than the other groups (P < 0.001), and SE progression was higher in the High-risk group (-0.33 ± 0.37D/year) than in children with myopia (-0.08 ± 0.55D/year). CONCLUSION: Timely utilization of ophthalmic clinical services among children aged 4 to 6 years who fail school vision screenings can significantly reduce the incidence of myopia and slow SE progression.

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.

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.

Comparison of the new self-contained darkroom refractive screener versus table-top autorefractor and cycloplegia retinoscopy in detecting refractive error.

PURPOSE: By comparing the results of the new self-contained darkroom refractive screener (YD-SX-A) versus table-top autorefractor and cycloplegic retinoscopy, to evaluate the performance of the YD-SX-A in detecting refractive error in children and adolescents and then judge whether it can be used in refractive screening. METHODS: Cross-sectional study. 1000 participants between the ages of 6 and 18 who visited the Optometry Center of the People's Hospital of Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region from June to December 2022 were selected. First, participants were instructed to measure their diopter with a table-top autorefractor (Topcon KR8800) and YD-SX-A in a noncycloplegic setting. After cycloplegia, they were retinoscopy by a professional optometrist. The results measured by three methods were collected respectively. To avoid deviation, only the right eye (1000 eyes) data were used in the statistical analysis. The Bland-Altman plots were used to evaluate the agreement of diopters measured by the three methods. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves was used to analysis effectiveness of detecting refractive error of YD-SX-A. RESULTS: The average age of participants was 10.77 ± 3.00 years, including 504 boys (50.4%) and 496 girls (49.6%). When YD-SX-A and cycloplegia retinoscopy (CR) were compared in the myopia group, there was no statistical difference in spherical equivalent (SE) (P > 0.05), but there was a statistical difference in diopter spherical (DS) and diopter cylinder (DC) (P < 0.05). Comparing the diopter results of Topcon KR8800 and CR, the difference between each test value in the myopia group was statistically significant (P < 0.05). In the hyperopia group, the comparison between YD-SX-A and CR showed no statistically significant differences in the DC (P > 0.05), but there were significant differences in the SE and DS (P < 0.05). In the astigmatism group, the SE, DS, and DC were statistically different, and the DC of YD-SX-A was lower than that of CR and Topcon KR8800. Bland-Altman plots indicated that YD-SX-A has a moderate agreement with CR and Topcon KR8800. The sensitivity and specificity of YD-SX-A for detecting myopia, hyperopia and astigmatism were 90.17% and 90.32%, 97.78% and 87.88%, 84.08% and 74.26%, respectively. CONCLUSION: This study has identified that YD-SX-A has shown good performance in both agreement and effectiveness in detecting refractive error when compared with Topcon KR8800 and CR. YD-SX-A could be a useful tool for large-scale population refractive screening.

Discrimination of paediatric acuity test optotypes by 6-year-old children.

PURPOSE: To compare the discrimination performance of 6-year-old children for optotypes from six paediatric visual acuity tests and to fit Luce's Biased Choice Model to the data to estimate the relative similarities and bias for each optotype. METHODS: Full data sets were collected from 20 typically developing 6-year-olds who had passed a vision screening. They were presented with single optotypes labelled 6/12 at a distance of 9 m and were asked to identify the optotype using a matching task containing all optotypes from the relevant test. The data were combined to form a confusion matrix for each test and a biased choice model was fitted to the data. RESULTS: Median correct performance varied from 40% to 100% across optotypes, with the HOTV test having the highest values. Estimates of the similarity of each pair of optotypes indicated equal values for all pairs in the Landolt C, HOTV, Lea numbers and Tumbling E tests. The values differed for the picture tests, that is Lea Symbols and Allen figures. The estimates of bias for each individual optotype also indicated different values with the picture tests. CONCLUSIONS: Previous studies of the threshold acuity of young children and adults have indicated differences in acuity estimates across paediatric tests. A recognition acuity task typically requires resolving the difference information between optotypes. The performance of the 6-year-olds here reveals variance in similarity and bias values for picture tests, particularly for the Allen figures when compared with the Lea Symbols. Ideally, this analysis should be performed when designing new tests, and these results motivate progression from the use of current picture tests to well calibrated letter or number tests at the earliest possible age.

Validation of a simple-to-use, affordable, portable, wavefront aberrometry-based auto refractometer in the adult population: A prospective study.

BACKGROUND: Refraction is one of the key components of a comprehensive eye examination. Auto refractometers that are reliable and affordable can be beneficial, especially in a low-resource community setting. The study aimed to validate the accuracy of a novel wave-front aberrometry-based auto refractometer, Instaref R20 against the open-field system and subjective refraction in an adult population. METHODS: All the participants underwent a comprehensive eye examination including objective refraction, subjective acceptance, anterior and posterior segment evaluation. Refraction was performed without cycloplegia using WAM5500 open-field auto refractometer (OFAR) and Instaref R20, the study device. Agreement between both methods was evaluated using Bland-Altman analysis. The repeatability of the device based on three measurements in a subgroup of 40 adults was assessed. RESULTS: The refractive error was measured in 132 participants (mean age,30.53 ± 9.36 years, 58.3% female). The paired mean difference of the refraction values of the study device against OFAR was - 0.13D for M, - 0.0002D (J0) and - 0.13D (J45) and against subjective refraction (SR) was - 0.09D (M), 0.06 (J0) and 0.03D (J45). The device agreed within +/- 0.50D of OFAR in 78% of eyes for M, 79% for J0 and 78% for J45. The device agreed within +/- 0.5D of SR values for M (84%), J0 (86%) and J45 (89%). CONCLUSION: This study found a good agreement between the measurements obtained with the portable autorefractor against open-field refractometer and SR values. It has a potential application in population-based community vision screening programs for refractive error correction without the need for highly trained personnel.

Detection of Significant Hyperopia in Preschool Children Using Two Automated Vision Screeners.

SIGNIFICANCE: Moderate to high uncorrected hyperopia in preschool children is associated with amblyopia, strabismus, reduced visual function, and reduced literacy. Detecting significant hyperopia during screening is important to allow children to be followed for development of amblyopia or strabismus and implementation of any needed ophthalmic or educational interventions. PURPOSE: This study aimed to compare the sensitivity and specificity of two automated screening devices to identify preschool children with moderate to high hyperopia. METHODS: Children in the Vision in Preschoolers (VIP) study were screened with the Retinomax Autorefractor (Nikon, Inc., Melville, NY) and Plusoptix Power Refractor II (Plusoptix, Nuremberg, Germany) and examined by masked eye care professionals to detect the targeted conditions of amblyopia, strabismus, or significant refractive error, and reduced visual acuity. Significant hyperopia (American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus definition of hyperopia as an amblyopia risk factor), based on cycloplegic retinoscopy, was >4.00 D for age 36 to 48 months and >3.50 D for age older than 48 months. Referral criteria from VIP for each device and from a distributor (PediaVision) for the Power Refractor II were applied to screening results. RESULTS: Among 1430 children, 132 children had significant hyperopia in at least one eye. Using the VIP referral criteria, sensitivities for significant hyperopia were 80.3% for the Retinomax and 69.7% for the Power Refractor II (difference, 10.6%; 95% confidence interval, 7.0 to 20.5%; P = .04); specificities relative to any targeted condition were 89.9 and 89.1%, respectively. Using the PediaVision referral criteria for the Power Refractor, sensitivity for significant hyperopia was 84.9%; however, specificity relative to any targeted condition was 78.3%, 11.6% lower than the specificity for the Retinomax. Analyses using the VIP definition of significant hyperopia yielded results similar to when the American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus definition was used. DISCUSSION: When implementing vision screening programs for preschool children, the potential for automated devices that use eccentric photorefraction to either miss detecting significant hyperopia or increase false-positive referrals must be taken into consideration.

Towards a national pre-school vision screening programme.

The aim of the study is to examine common approaches to pre-school vision screening, including the current New South Wales model which is known as Statewide Eyesight Preschooler Screening (StEPS) to determine whether the criteria set by the World Health Organization are fulfilled by StEPS, and therefore, whether there is sufficient justification to deploy a similar model nationally. A literature review was conducted to answer four key questions related to vision screening. The authors sought to review (i) the justification for vision screening of a pre-school population; (ii) the principles and best approaches to vision screening such as how, where and who should conduct vision screening; (iii) the conditions that are targeted in vision screening; and (iv) the acceptable pass/fail vision screening criteria. The StEPS vision screening model is an accurate, reliable and economical way of screening for reduced vision at a time when neural plasticity allows improvement in vision following intervention. It fulfils World Health Organization criteria for a successful screening programme. StEPS has very high participation rates compared to other screening methods in Australia due to its unique model whereby screeners utilise early childhood settings to recruit and screen 4-year-old children. Due consideration should be given to deploying the StEPS vision screening model nationally.

Screening for Impaired Visual Acuity in Older Adults: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement.

Importance: Impairment of visual acuity is a serious public health problem in older adults. The number of persons 60 years or older with impaired visual acuity (defined as best corrected visual acuity worse than 20/40 but better than 20/200) was estimated at 2.91 million in 2015, and the number who are blind (defined as best corrected visual acuity of 20/200 or worse) was estimated at 760 000. Impaired visual acuity is consistently associated with decreased quality of life in older persons, including reduced ability to perform activities of daily living, work, and drive safely, as well as increased risk of falls and other unintentional injuries. Objective: To update its 2016 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review to evaluate the benefits and harms of screening for impaired visual acuity in older adults. Population: Asymptomatic adults 65 years or older who present in primary care without known impaired visual acuity and are not seeking care for vision problems. Evidence Assessment: The USPSTF concludes that the evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for impaired visual acuity in asymptomatic older adults. The evidence is lacking, and the balance of benefits and harms cannot be determined. More research is needed. Recommendation: The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for impaired visual acuity in older adults. (I statement).

Screening for Impaired Visual Acuity in Older Adults: Updated Evidence Report and Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force.

Importance: A 2016 review for the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) found that effective treatments are available for refractive errors, cataracts, and wet (advanced neovascular) or dry (atrophic) age-related macular degeneration (AMD), but there were no differences between visual screening vs no screening on visual acuity or other outcomes. Objective: To update the 2016 review on screening for impaired visual acuity in older adults, to inform the USPSTF. Data Sources: Ovid MEDLINE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (to February 2021); surveillance through January 21, 2022. Study Selection: Randomized clinical trials and controlled observational studies on screening, vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) inhibitors (wet AMD), and antioxidant vitamins and minerals (dry AMD); studies on screening diagnostic accuracy. Data Extraction and Synthesis: One investigator abstracted data and a second checked accuracy. Two investigators independently assessed study quality. Results: Twenty-five studies (N = 33 586) were included (13 trials, 11 diagnostic accuracy studies, and 1 systematic review [19 trials]). Four trials (n = 4819) found no significant differences between screening vs no screening in visual acuity or other outcomes. Visual acuity tests (3 studies; n = 6493) and screening question (3 studies; n = 5203) were associated with suboptimal diagnostic accuracy. For wet AMD, 4 trials (n = 2086) found VEGF inhibitors significantly associated with greater likelihood of 15 or more letters visual acuity gain (risk ratio [RR], 2.92 [95% CI, 1.20-7.12]; I2 = 76%; absolute risk difference [ARD], 10%) and less than 15 letters visual acuity loss (RR, 1.46 [95% CI, 1.22-1.75]; I2 = 80%; ARD, 27%) vs sham treatment, with no increased risk of serious harms. For dry AMD, a systematic review (19 trials) found antioxidant multivitamins significantly associated with decreased risk of progression to late AMD (3 trials, n = 2445; odds ratio [OR], 0.72 [95% CI, 0.58-0.90]) and 3 lines or more visual acuity loss (1 trial, n = 1791; OR, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.62-0.96]) vs placebo. Zinc was significantly associated with increased risk of genitourinary events and beta carotene with increased risk of lung cancer in former smokers; other serious harms were infrequent. Conclusions and Relevance: This review found that effective treatments are available for common causes of impaired visual acuity in older adults. However, direct evidence found no significant association between vision screening vs no screening in primary care and improved visual outcomes.

Cost-Effectiveness of photoscreeners in screening at-risk amblyopia in Indian children.

Objectives: Amblyopia is the most common cause of preventable vision impairment in children. This study tried to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of photoscreeners in identifying refractive errors making children at risk of amblyopia. Materials and Methods: This was designed as a prospective, open-label, randomized controlled study to compare the cost-effectiveness of photoscreeners (2WIN Adaptica and Plusoptix) versus autorefractor and Mohindra retinoscopy to identify the at-risk amblyopia. This study was conducted from October 2018 to December 2018 in coordination with Nanna Kannu school screening project and children in the age group of 5-11 years were included in the study. The photoscreening was done by lay screeners. A supervising ophthalmologist collated all data. Cost-effectiveness was calculated for the individual instruments and compared. The average time is taken for each instrument to record the refractive error was calculated and compared with the Mohindra retinoscopy. Results: Number of children included in this study was 2910. The mean age of the children was 7.82 + 0.65 years. The mean time taken for 2WIN Adaptica was 6 sec, Topcon -10 s, and Plusoptix -4 s. Plusoptix showed the minimal time for screening a child when compared to all other methods. The Plusoptix and 2WIN Adaptica were shown to be cost-effective when compared to Mohindra retinoscopy (P < 0.05). Conclusion: Photoscreening using Plusoptix and 2WIN Adaptica with lay screeners was < seven times the cost incurred and five times faster than the trained optometrists using either autorefractor or Mohindra retinoscopy and thus more cost-effective in screening a large number of young children with at-risk amblyopia at the community level.

The Utility of Routine Fundus Photography Screening for Posterior Segment Disease: A Stepped-wedge, Cluster-randomized Trial in South India.

PURPOSE: To assess whether routine fundus photography (RFP) to screen for posterior segment disease at community eye clinics (vision centers [VCs]) in India increases referral to centralized ophthalmolic care. DESIGN: Stepped-wedge, cluster-randomized trial. PARTICIPANTS: Patients aged 40 to 75 years and those aged 20 to 40 years with a known history of hypertension or diabetes mellitus presenting to 4 technician-run VCs associated with the Aravind Eye Care System in India. METHODS: VCs (clusters) were randomized to standard care or RFP across five 2-week study periods (steps). Patients in each cluster received standard care initially. At the start of each subsequent step, a randomly chosen cluster crossed over to providing RFP to eligible patients. All clusters took part in RFP during the last step. Standard care involved technician eye exams, optional fundus photography, and teleconsultation with an ophthalmologist. RFP involved eye exams, dilation and 40-degree fundus photography, and teleconsultation with an ophthalmologist. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Standard care and RFP clusters were compared by the proportion of patients referred for in-person evaluation by an ophthalmologist because of fundus photography findings and urgency of referral (urgently in ≤ 2 weeks vs. nonurgently in > 2 weeks). Generalized linear mixed models adjusting for cluster and step were used to estimate the odds of referral due to fundus photography findings compared with standard care. RESULTS: A total of 1447 patients were enrolled across the VCs, including 737 in the standard care group and 710 in the RFP group. Compared with standard care, the RFP group had a higher proportion of referrals due to fundus photography findings (11.3% vs. 4.4%), nonurgent referrals due to fundus photography (9.3% vs. 3.3%), and urgent referrals due to fundus photography (1.8% vs. 1.1%). The RFP intervention was associated with a 2-fold increased odds of being referred because of photography findings compared with standard care (odds ratio, 2.07; 95% confidence interval, 0.98-4.40; P = 0.058). CONCLUSIONS: Adding RFP to community eye clinics was associated with an increased odds of referral compared with standard care. This increase in referral was mostly due to nonurgent posterior segment disease.

Trends in diabetic retinopathy screening attendance and associations with vision impairment attributable to diabetes in a large nationwide cohort.

AIMS: To investigate diabetic retinopathy screening attendance and trends in certified vision impairment caused by diabetic eye disease. METHODS: This was a retrospective study of attendance in three urban UK diabetic eye screening programmes in England. A survival analysis was performed to investigate time from diagnosis to first screen by age and sex. Logistic regression analysis of factors influencing screening attendance during a 15-month reporting period was conducted, as well as analysis of new vision impairment certifications (Certificate of Vision Impairment) in England and Wales from 2009 to 2019. RESULTS: Of those newly registered in the Routine Digital Screening pathway (n = 97 048), 80% attended screening within the first 12 months and 88% by 36 months. Time from registration to first eye screening was longer for people aged 18-34 years, and 20% were unscreened after 3 years. Delay in first screen was associated with increased risk of referable retinopathy. Although 95% of participants (n = 291 296) attended during the 15-month reporting period, uptake varied considerably. Younger age, social deprivation, ethnicity and duration of diabetes were independent predictors of non-attendance and referable retinopathy. Although the last 10 years has seen an overall reduction in vision impairment certification attributable to diabetic eye disease, the incidence of vision impairment in those aged <35 years was unchanged. CONCLUSIONS: Whilst the majority of participants are screened in a timely manner, there is considerable variation in uptake. Young adults, have sub-optimal attendance, and levels of vision impairment in this population have not changed over the last 10 years. There is an urgent need to explore barriers to/enablers of attendance in this group to inform policy initiatives and tailored interventions to address this issue.

Evaluation of a Portable Wavefront Aberrometer for Community Screening Refraction in the Elderly.

SIGNIFICANCE: The SVOne may prove useful to quickly and easily assess refractive correction needs in community screenings and low-resource settings, but not all subjects were testable with the device. PURPOSE: This study aimed to compare the SVOne handheld, smartphone-based wavefront aberrometer with a tabletop autorefractor in identifying refractive errors in elderly subjects. METHODS: Participants 50 years or older at community eye screenings with visual acuity worse than 20/40 in either eye underwent autorefraction followed by two SVOne trials. Power vectors of right eye data were analyzed. RESULTS: Of 84 subjects who underwent autorefraction, 67 (79.8%) were successfully autorefracted with the SVOne, of whom 82.1% (55/67) had a successful repeat reading. Mean M (spherical equivalent) values from tabletop and handheld autorefraction were -0.21 D (95% confidence interval [CI], -0.71 to +0.29 D) and -0.29 D (95% CI, -0.79 to +0.21 D), respectively (P > .05). Mean astigmatism values from tabletop and handheld devices were +1.06 D (95% CI, 0.87 to 1.26 D) and +1.21 D (95% CI, 0.99 to 1.43 D), respectively (P > .05). Intraclass correlation coefficients between devices were 0.95 (95% CI, 0.93 to 0.97) for M, 0.78 (95% CI, 0.66 to 0.86) for J0, and 0.45 (95% CI, 0.24 to 0.63) for J45 (P < .05 for all). Excellent test-retest correlation between SVOne measurements was noted for M (Pearson correlation [r] = 0.96; P < .05), but a weaker correlation was noted for J0 and J45 (r = 0.67 and r = 0.63 [P < .05 for both], respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The SVOne provided strong agreement for M, with the majority of readings within ±1.00 D of each other, when compared with the tabletop autorefractor. A weaker but still good correlation was noted for astigmatism. Similar findings were noted when assessing repeatability.

Spectacle non-tolerance in clinical practice - a systematic review with meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: Spectacle non-tolerance or adverse events to spectacle wear are serious concerns for both patients and practitioners. Non-tolerance may contribute to a negative impact on the practitioner's ability and practice. Therefore, a detailed understanding of frequency and causes of spectacle non-tolerance in clinical ophthalmic practice is essential. This review aimed to determine the prevalence and causes of non-tolerance to spectacles prescribed and dispensed in clinical practice. METHOD: The current systematic review included quantitative studies published in the English language that reported spectacle non-tolerance in clinical practice. A comprehensive search was conducted in PubMed, Scopus and the Web of Science database for studies published until 13 July 2020. An adapted version of the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) modified for cross-sectional studies was used to assess the quality of each included study. Five investigations with 205,478 study participants were included in the review. The prevalence of spectacle non-tolerance from individual studies was pooled using MetaXL software. The pooled prevalence of spectacle non-tolerance was 2.1% (95% CI: 1.6-2.7) ranging from 1.6% to 3.0%. The papers were also reviewed to identify the potential causes of non-tolerances. Nearly half reported that non-tolerance (47.4%) was due to an error in refraction. Other causes identified were errors related to communication (16.3%), dispensing (13.5%), non-adaptation (9.7%), data entry (8.7%), binocular vision (7.4%) and ocular pathology (6.4%). SUMMARY: This review improves our understanding of spectacle non-tolerance in clinical practice. This is important because non-tolerance may lead to spectacle wear discontinuation, which may deprive patients of optimal vision. Increased non-tolerance in clinical practice may affect a clinician's reputation and incur additional costs associated with reassessments and replacements. Spectacle non-tolerance occurred due to a multitude of factors related to optical dispensing and wearer adaptation. Therefore, there is a need for vigilance while prescribing spectacles. The limited evidence highlights the need for more studies, especially in limited-resource settings, to improve the quality of refractive error services.

Diagnostic accuracy of the Parr vision test, single crowded Lea symbols and Spot vision screener for vision screening of preschool children aged 4-5 years in Aotearoa/New Zealand.

PURPOSE: Preschool children in New Zealand undergo vision screening to detect amblyopia at 4-5 years of age. The current test, the Parr vision test, does not meet international visual acuity chart guidelines and has not been validated against other commonly used paediatric vision tests. New Zealand vision screening protocols are also not targeted for detecting other eye conditions such as uncorrected refractive error, which may affect school performance. We compared the Parr vision test with the single crowded Lea symbols and the Spot vision screener for detecting ocular pathology, refractive error and amblyopic risk factors in preschool children. METHODS: A cross-sectional diagnostic accuracy study recruited children aged 4-5 years via convenience sampling from the University of Auckland Optometry Clinic and through primary schools in Auckland, New Zealand. Participants received vision screening with the three different instruments administered by a lay screener. Comprehensive eye examinations were completed by a paediatric optometrist to determine the presence of vision disorders. RESULTS: Of 197 children who received a comprehensive eye examination, 14 (7.1%) had amblyopic risk factors and 43 (21.8%) had significant refractive error (15.7% with astigmatism, 9.1% with hyperopia). The sensitivity for detecting any ocular condition did not differ significantly between the tests (50.0% for Parr, 43.5% for Lea, 42.5% for Spot). Specificity was significantly lower for the Parr vision test (80.8%) than for the Lea symbols (93.4%) and Spot vision screener (98.0%). Adding the Spot vision screener to measurements of visual acuity significantly improved sensitivity in detecting any ocular condition with the Parr vision test (67.5% for Parr/Spot vs 50% for Parr alone), but not with the Lea symbols (52.5% for Lea/Spot vs 43.5% for Lea alone). CONCLUSION: The sensitivity of the Parr vision test for detecting ocular conditions in preschool children does not vary significantly from that achieved by the Lea symbols or the Spot vision screener. However, current New Zealand vision screening protocols could be improved by expanding the target conditions to include significant refractive error and incorporating the use of the Spot vision screener to increase the accuracy with which children with refractive error are identified. Future research should include longitudinal studies to determine the effect of preschool vision screening on later ocular and academic outcomes.

Prevalence, causes and risk factors of reduced VA and persistent reduced VA among preschool children in Eastern China.

AIMS: To determine prevalence, causes, and risk factors of reduced uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA), reduced presenting visual acuity (PVA), and persistent reduced visual acuity (VA) among Chinese preschool children. METHODS: The longitudinal, population-based Nanjing Eye Study (NES) was carried out. Children underwent baseline comprehensive ocular examinations in 2016 (at 48-60 months old) and the follow-up ocular examinations in 2017. A comprehensive questionnaire about children and their families was completed by their legal guardians. For children having reduced PVA at baseline, a follow-up questionnaire about potential factors concerning VA correction was completed. Reduced VA was defined as VA worse than 0.30 logMAR (Snellen equivalent 6/12, 20/40), and persistent reduced VA was defined as reduced PVA in both 2016 and 2017. RESULTS: Among 1448 participants with both eye examinations and questionnaires completed, prevalence of reduced UCVA, reduced PVA, and persistent reduced VA at age of 60-72 months were 5.94%, 3.04%, and 1.59% respectively. Causes for reduced PVA were refractive error (79.5%), amblyopia (18.2%), and amblyopia combined nystagmus (2.3%). Among 23 children having persistent reduced VA, causes of reduced PVA remained unchanged in 13 children and 4 children developed amblyopia from refractive error. Younger age (OR = 1.09 for each month decrease, p = 0.01) and non-breastfeeding (OR = 2.08, p = 0.03) were risk factors for reduced UCVA. Younger children with reduced UCVA were at higher risk of having reduced PVA (OR = 1.18 for each month decrease, p = 0.04). Children with siblings (OR = 5.95, p = 0.02) were more likely to have persistent reduced VA. CONCLUSIONS: Future vision health promotion strategies among preschool children should focus on early vision-screening and timely refractive correction. Apart from children of non-breastfeeding mothers, attention should also be paid to children with siblings.

Implementing a School Vision Screening Program in Botswana Using Smartphone Technology.

Purpose: Child eye health is a significant public health issue in low- and middle-income countries, such as Botswana, and the need for eye care requires a well-integrated and innovative approach. Traditional vision screening tools are costly, difficult to transport, and reliant on highly trained eye care professionals. Novel smartphone-based vision screening technologies, however, are low cost, portable, and easily operated by trained novice users. Peek Vision is a mobile health (m-Health) organization that creates smartphone applications that screen for visual acuity, generate referrals to eye care professionals, and send phone notifications to those being screened. Methodology: In 2016, the government of Botswana partnered with local and international stakeholders to implement Peek vision screening in a subset of schoolchildren. From June to December of 2016, teachers, health assistants, nurses, and other volunteers in 49 schools in the Goodhope Subdistrict utilized Peek applications to screen schoolchildren, using acuity <6/12 in the better eye as a threshold for visual impairment. Results: Among 12,877 children screened, the application identified 16% (2,065/12,877) as screening positive for visual impairment, and these students were referred for optometric care. Ultimately, 96% (1,985/2,065) attended optometry triage camps, during which 42% (835/1,985) were provided with spectacles, 5% (94/1,985) received ophthalmic medications, and 3% (63/1,985) were referred for ophthalmic care. These findings underscore the need for comprehensive vision screening in schoolchildren in Botswana. Furthermore, the successful implementation of Peek smartphone applications illustrates the potential of m-Health technology for enacting comprehensive vision screening programs at a national level in Botswana and other similar countries.

Performance of the Lea symbols chart for screening Nigerian children aged 3 to 5 years.

BACKGROUND: Vision screening in children of preschool age (age 3-5 years) gives the opportunity for timely detection of amblyopia. The tools that would be used for screening must have high rates of testability in these young children, and must have high enough sensitivity and specificity to be reliable and cost effective. AIMS: To assess the performance of the Lea symbols chart as a screening tool in children aged 3 to 5 years attending primary schools in Kwara State, Nigeria. METHODS: Visual acuity (VA) of 464 children selected from 12 schools by a multistage sampling procedure was checked using the Lea symbols chart by trained Lea screeners. Children meeting the referral criteria and untestable children had a comprehensive eye examination. Testability rates, sensitivity, specificity, positive, and negative predictive values were analyzed based on age and gender, with corresponding significance values generated. RESULTS: Testability rates among 5 year olds were as high as 99.1%, decreasing significantly to 95.5% in 4 year olds and 85.7% in 3 year olds (p value < 0.001). Visual acuity performance improved with age (p value 0.002) but was unrelated to gender. The Lea symbols chart had an overall specificity of 77.4% (63.2% among 3 year olds and 83.5% among 5 year olds). At VA thresholds of 6/12 for 5 year olds and 6/15 for 3-4 year olds, the screening tool became 87.7% specific among 3 year olds and 94.3% specific among 5 year olds (overall 92.5%). CONCLUSION: The Lea symbols chart was found to be a useful screening tool in this environment, especially among 5 year olds. The reduced specificity among 3-4 year olds may prompt further research into the appropriate VA thresholds for 3-4 year olds to reduce the burden of unnecessary comprehensive eye evaluations resulting from too many false positive results.