The effect of an on-site vision examination on adherence to vision screening recommendations.

Vision screenings are intended to efficiently identify students with possible visual impairment and initiate a referral for diagnosis and treatment. In many cases, at-risk students do not access the recommended care or experience delays in receiving care. The purpose of this article is to report the effect on adherence to vision screening recommendations by providing the eye examination at the students' school and at no cost. Of the 1,306 students screened, 382 (29.2%) were identified with possible visual impairment. Parental consent for examination was obtained for 198 (51.8%) students. Our vision screening and examination program yielded similar adherence to follow-up as stand-alone vision screening programs. Future program considerations should address perceptual barriers that may be contributing to parental nonadherence to vision screening recommendations.

Atropine vs patching for treatment of moderate amblyopia: follow-up at 15 years of age of a randomized clinical trial.

IMPORTANCE: Initial treatment for amblyopia of the fellow eye with patching and atropine sulfate eyedrops improves visual acuity. Long-term data on the durability of treatment benefit are needed. OBJECTIVE: To report visual acuity at 15 years of age among patients who were younger than 7 years when enrolled in a treatment trial for moderate amblyopia. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: In a multicenter clinical trial, 419 children with amblyopia (visual acuity, 20/40 to 20/100) were randomly assigned to patching (minimum of 6 h/d) or atropine sulfate eyedrops, 1% (1 drop daily), for 6 months. Treatment after 6 months was at the discretion of the investigator. Two years after enrollment, an unselected subgroup of 188 children were enrolled into long-term follow-up. INTERVENTION: Initial treatment with patching or atropine with subsequent treatment at investigator discretion. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Visual acuity at 15 years of age with the electronic Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study test in amblyopic and fellow eyes. RESULTS: Mean visual acuity in the amblyopic eye measured in 147 participants at 15 years of age was 0.14 logMAR (approximately 20/25); 59.9% of amblyopic eyes had visual acuity of 20/25 or better and 33.3%, 20/20 or better. Mean interocular acuity difference (IOD) at 15 years of age was 0.21 logMAR (2.1 lines); 48.3% had an IOD of 2 or more lines and 71.4%, 1 or more lines. Treatment (other than spectacles) was prescribed for 9 participants (6.1%) aged 10 to 15 years. Mean IOD was similar at examinations at 10 and 15 years of age (2.0 and 2.1 logMAR lines, respectively; P = .39). Better visual acuity at the 15-year examination was achieved in those who were younger than 5 years at the time of entry into the randomized clinical trial (mean logMAR, 0.09) compared with those aged 5 to 6 years (mean logMAR, 0.18; P < .001). When we compared subgroups based on original treatment with atropine or patching, no significant differences were observed in visual acuity of amblyopic and fellow eyes at 15 years of age (P = .44 and P = .43, respectively). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: At 15 years of age, most children treated for moderate amblyopia when younger than 7 years have good visual acuity, although mild residual amblyopia is common. The outcome is similar regardless of initial treatment with atropine or patching. The results indicate that improvement occurring with amblyopia treatment is maintained until at least 15 years of age. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00000170.

Symptoms in children with convergence insufficiency: before and after treatment.

PURPOSE: To investigate symptom patterns and evaluate the relationship between patient characteristics and symptom severity before and after treatment for symptomatic children with convergence insufficiency (CI). METHODS: In a randomized clinical trial, the convergence insufficiency symptom survey was administered pre- and posttreatment to 221 children aged 9 to <18 years with symptomatic CI. Frequency of symptom type was determined at baseline, mean change in performance-related vs. eye-related symptoms for treatment responders was compared, and the relationship between patient characteristics and symptom severity at baseline for the entire cohort and after treatment for those who responded to treatment was determined. RESULTS: At baseline, the score for performance-related symptoms was greater than that for eye-related symptoms (mean response of 2.3 vs. 1.8, p < 0.001) regardless of age, sex, race/ethnicity, or presence of parent-reported Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). Symptom severity increased with age for both the overall and eye-related subscale scores (p = 0.048, p = 0.022, respectively). Children with parent-reported ADHD were more symptomatic (p = 0.005) than those without parent-reported ADHD because of a higher performance-related score (p < 0.001). A significant and equal improvement (p < 0.01) for the performance- and eye-related symptoms was found in treatment responders. Girls had significantly lower performance-related symptoms than boys (p = 0.014), and black children reported less eye-related symptoms than white children (p = 0.022). Children without parent-reported ADHD had significantly less symptoms overall and less eye-related symptoms than children with parent-reported ADHD (p = 0.019, p = 0.011, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Because of a high frequency of both performance- and eye-related symptoms, clinicians should perform a targeted history that addresses both types of symptoms to help identify children with symptomatic CI. Future study regarding the relationship of CI and symptoms and their potential influence on ADHD, reading performance, and attention is warranted.

Validity of the convergence insufficiency symptom survey: a confirmatory study.

PURPOSE: The objectives of the present study were to evaluate whether investigator bias influenced the Convergence Insufficiency Symptom Survey (CISS) scores of children with normal binocular vision (NBV) in our original validation study, reevaluate the usefulness of the cutoff score of 16, and reexamine the validity of the CISS. METHODS: Six clinical sites participating in the Convergence Insufficiency Treatment Trial (CITT) enrolled 46 children 9 to <18 years with NBV. Examiners masked to the child's binocular vision status administered the CISS. The mean CISS score was compared with that from the children with NBV in the original, unmasked CISS study and also to that of the 221 symptomatic convergence insufficiency (CI) children enrolled in the CITT. RESULTS: The mean (+/-standard deviation) CISS score for 46 subjects with NBV was 10.4 (+/-8.1). This was comparable with our prior unmasked NBV study (mean = 8.1 (+/-6.2); p = 0.11) but was significantly different from that of the CITT CI group (mean = 29.8 +/- 9.0; p < 0.001). Eighty-three percent of these NBV subjects scored <16 on the CISS, which is not statistically different from the 87.5% found in the original unmasked study (p = 0.49). CONCLUSIONS: Examiner bias did not affect the CISS scores for subjects with NBV in our prior study. The CISS continues to be a valid instrument for quantifying symptoms in 9 to <18-year-old children. These results also confirm the validity of a cut-point of > or = 16 in distinguishing children with symptomatic CI from those with NBV.

Treatment of strabismic amblyopia with refractive correction.

PURPOSE: To report data on the response of previously untreated strabismic amblyopia to spectacle correction. DESIGN: Prospective, interventional case series. METHODS: Twelve patients with previously untreated strabismic amblyopia were prescribed spectacles and examined at five-week intervals until visual acuity was not improved from the prior visit. RESULTS: Amblyopic eye acuity improved by 2 lines or more from spectacle-corrected baseline acuity in nine of the 12 patients (75%), resolving in three (interocular difference

Treatment of anisometropic amblyopia in children with refractive correction.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of refractive correction alone for the treatment of untreated anisometropic amblyopia in children 3 to <7 years old. DESIGN: Prospective, multicenter, noncomparative intervention. PARTICIPANTS: Eighty-four children 3 to <7 years old with untreated anisometropic amblyopia ranging from 20/40 to 20/250. METHODS: Optimal refractive correction was provided, and visual acuity (VA) was measured with the new spectacle correction at baseline and at 5-week intervals until VA stabilized or amblyopia resolved. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Maximum improvement in best-corrected VA in the amblyopic eye and proportion of children whose amblyopia resolved (interocular difference of < or =1 line) with refractive correction alone. RESULTS: Amblyopia improved with optical correction by > or =2 lines in 77% of the patients and resolved in 27%. Improvement took up to 30 weeks for stabilization criteria to be met. After stabilization, additional improvement occurred with spectacles alone in 21 of 34 patients observed in a control group of a subsequent randomized trial, with amblyopia resolving in 6. Treatment outcome was not related to age, but was related to better baseline VA and lesser amounts of anisometropia. CONCLUSION: Refractive correction alone improves VA in many cases and results in resolution of amblyopia in at least one third of 3- to <7-year-old children with untreated anisometropic amblyopia. Although most cases of resolution occur with moderate (20/40-20/100) amblyopia, the average 3-line improvement in VA resulting from treatment with spectacles may lessen the burden of subsequent amblyopia therapy for those with denser levels of amblyopia.

A randomized trial to evaluate 2 hours of daily patching for strabismic and anisometropic amblyopia in children.

OBJECTIVE: To compare 2 hours of daily patching (combined with 1 hour of concurrent near visual activities) with a control group of spectacle wear alone (if needed) for treatment of moderate to severe amblyopia in children 3 to 7 years old. DESIGN: Prospective randomized multicenter clinical trial (46 sites). PARTICIPANTS: One hundred eighty children 3 to 7 years old with best-corrected amblyopic-eye visual acuity (VA) of 20/40 to 20/400 associated with strabismus, anisometropia, or both who had worn optimal refractive correction (if needed) for at least 16 weeks or for 2 consecutive visits without improvement. INTERVENTION: Randomization either to 2 hours of daily patching with 1 hour of near visual activities or to spectacles alone (if needed). Patients were continued on the randomized treatment (or no treatment) until no further improvement was noted. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Best-corrected VA in the amblyopic eye after 5 weeks. RESULTS: Improvement in VA of the amblyopic eye from baseline to 5 weeks averaged 1.1 lines in the patching group and 0.5 lines in the control group (P = 0.006), and improvement from baseline to best measured VA at any visit averaged 2.2 lines in the patching group and 1.3 lines in the control group (P<0.001). CONCLUSION: After a period of treatment with spectacles, 2 hours of daily patching combined with 1 hour of near visual activities modestly improves moderate to severe amblyopia in children 3 to 7 years old.

Color vision screening for individuals with intellectual disabilities: a comparison between the Neitz Test of Color Vision and Color Vision Testing Made Easy.

BACKGROUND: The Neitz Test of Color Vision (Neitz) and Color Vision Testing Made Easy(trade mark) (CVTME) were compared to determine which test was more effective in evaluating patients with intellectual disability (i.e., mental retardation) and developmental delay. METHODS: Two hundred eight Special Olympics floor hockey athletes were screened in San Diego, California, and 93 athletes were screened in Long Beach, California for a total of 301 athletes. Each athlete was administered the CVTME and the Neitz tests. RESULTS: The pass rate for the CVTME was 94.6% (n = 93) at Long Beach and 96.2% (n = 208) at San Diego. Every athlete was able to complete the CVTME. The pass rate for the Neitz was 38.7% at Long Beach and 56.7% at San Diego. Additionally, 10.8% of the Long Beach athletes and 12.5% of the San Diego athletes were unable to understand the Neitz. In addition, there was a low level of agreement between the results from the 2 tests with kappa = 0.081 for the San Diego data and 0.028 for the Long Beach data. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that the CVTME continues to be the screening test of choice in evaluating color vision in individuals with intellectual disability. The Neitz had more failing scores on the first attempt and more total failing scores leading to over-referrals, making it an inappropriate screening test for individuals with intellectual disability and developmental delay.

Relationship between visual-motor integration and spatial organization of written language and math.

PURPOSE: The relationship between visual-motor integration and academic achievement is not clearly understood. The purpose of this study was to assess the type and frequency of errors made by children with poor visual-motor integration during a written language and math task. METHODS: Eighteen children with normal visual-motor integration (> or =36%) and 19 children with low visual-motor integration (< or =16%) participated in the study. The two groups had similar ages, gender profiles, and cognitive and reading levels. Each group copied and solved math problems and copied a written passage. The errors for the math and writing task were combined into a total error score, and the time taken to complete each task was combined into a total time score. RESULTS: The low visual-motor integration group made more errors than the normal visual-motor integration group. However, the time taken to copy both tasks was not different between the two groups. A secondary analysis of the errors revealed that alignment of numbers (p = 0.02), organization of math problems (p = 0.05), and spacing errors of letters and words (p = 0.01) were more common in the low visual-motor integration group. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that reduced visual-motor integration may contribute to poor spatial organization of written work.