A statistical analysis of Modified Clinical Technique vision screening of preschoolers by optometry students.

Fourth year optometry students screened 745 preschoolers using a slightly altered Modified Clinical Technique (MCT) under the supervision of a faculty doctor. Children who failed the MCT were randomly selected and then matched by age, sex, and ethnic origin to children who had passed the screening battery. The 61 screening failures and 45 matched controls were later given full eye examinations with cycloplegia by University of Alabama at Birmingham faculty doctors who were unaware of the screening results. The positive predictive value (PPV) (0.52) and negative predictive value (NPV) (0.78) of the MCT were calculated directly from the 2 x 2 contingency table crossing screening results and a standard diagnosis. Sensitivity [0.50, k(1,0) = 0.29], specificity [0.79, k(0,0) = 0.30], efficiency [0.70, k(0.5,0) = 0.29] of the MCT, and the prevalence (0.30) of children failing the standard diagnosis were estimated using statistics appropriate to the prospective sampling design. The reproducibility of the diagnosis, estimated by analyzing multiple, independent diagnosis of each study child by seven doctors was moderate (kappa D 0.58). Statistics summarizing the agreement between the MCT and the diagnosis by the individual study doctor are similar to those obtained with comparison to the standard diagnosis. The characteristics of the MCT may be generalized only to similar populations that are screened by clinicians with similar experience, using the same tests.

Evaluation of a new criterion of binocularity.

The purpose of this study was to assess a new criterion for binocular comfort analogous to the classical Sheard's criterion. Instead of equating the fusional demand with the monocular phoria as is done when Sheard's criterion is applied, the new criterion uses a calculated binocular fusional demand. The binocular demand was derived using a clinical measurement of the convergence accommodation per convergence (CA/C) ratio. Sheard's criterion was also evaluated. Other commonly used indicators of binocularity (heterophoria, vergences, accommodative amplitude, facility and response, fixation disparity, and the associated phoria) were measured. One hundred subjects (52 males, 48 females; mean age 26 years) were classified as either symptomatic or asymptomatic by an interviewing clinician. The examining clinician was intentionally masked as to the classification of the subjects. We hypothesized that the new criterion would best discriminate between the two groups of patients inasmuch as it is based on currently accepted dual-interaction models of accommodation and vergence. Our analysis confirmed that the CA/C ratio corresponded closely to those published previously (mean = 0.06 D/delta). Significant differences (p less than 0.05) were determined between the symptomatic and asymptomatic groups for gender, near phoria through a +2.00 D add, accommodative amplitude, positive vergences at near, and both the classical Sheard's and the new criterion. The new criterion was the best discriminator between the groups, identifying 72% correctly, an improvement of 6% over the classical Sheard's. However, various stepwise discriminant analysis procedures consistently failed to demonstrate that the calculated binocular fusional demand or the new criterion was superior to the near phoria or the classical Sheard's value. These results suggest potential clinical utility for new procedures based on recently described models of accommodation and vergence, but further development appears necessary.