Pediatric Vision Screening Research Articles

Prevalence of visual abnormalities detected through paediatric vision screening in Queensland, Australia.

Vision screening programs can provide epidemiological information regarding visual impairment in children. This study aims to report the characteristics of visual abnormalities diagnosed through the Primary School Nurse Health Readiness Program (PSNHRP) in Queensland, Australia. A retrospective review of vision screening records from the PSNHRP between January 2017 and December 2020 was undertaken. Children aged between 4 and 7 who underwent vision screening were included for review. Children with a visual acuity of worse than 6/9-1 using the Parr 4 m letter-matching chart or those who failed the SPOT Vision Screener were referred to an optometrist or ophthalmologist for review. 164 890 children underwent vision screening. 12148 children failed visual screening (7.4%) and were referred for an eye assessment. 6011 (69.4%) of the 8659 children who attended ophthalmic review had a confirmed visual abnormality. Of 164 890 screened children, 1187 (0.72%) were confirmed to have anisometropia, 3843 (2.33%) had refractive error, 194 (0.12%) had strabismus, 755 (0.46%) had anisometropic amblyopia, 136 (0.08%) had strabismic amblyopia, and 1356 (0.82%) had an unspecific abnormality. There was no statistically significant difference in the age at screening between any visual abnormality (p = 0.94). Anisometropia, refractive error, and strabismus were significantly more common in females than males (p = 0.03, p < 0.01, and p = 0.03 respectively), whereas anisometropic amblyopia was more common in males (p < 0.01). We report the prevalence of visual abnormalities detected through the PSNHRP vision screening program. Identification of medical or socioeconomic risk factors that are likely to be associated with visual abnormalities can help to optimise vision screening programs.

Assessing The Relationship Between Demand And Accessibility For Pediatric Ophthalmology Services By State In The United States.

To investigate the relationship between public demand for pediatric ophthalmology services and the accessibility of such services on a statewide basis in the United States, focusing on strabismus care. Using Google Trends data, search volumes for "strabismus" were analyzed from January 2014 to December 2023. Pediatric ophthalmologist availability was assessed via the American Academy of Ophthalmology directory, normalized for state population size to create a relative demand index. Additional metrics from the United States Census Bureau and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention provided socioeconomic and health data. Correlation coefficients were used to explore relationships between search volumes, specialist availability, vision screening, socioeconomics, and demographic factors. The data revealed variability in public interest in pediatric ophthalmology across states, with Alaska showing the highest relative search volume for strabismus. The data also indicated notable disparities in pediatric ophthalmologist density, with North Dakota, Vermont, and Wyoming having no pediatric ophthalmologists. A significant correlation was identified between pediatric ophthalmologist availability and vision screening (R = 0.486, p < 0.001). Negative correlations were observed between the relative demand index and urbanization (R = -0.388, p = 0.007), as well as the strabismus prevalence (R = -0.455, p = 0.001), indicating that urbanization and specialist distribution influence eyecare demand and access. The findings highlight disparities in accessibility and demand for pediatric ophthalmology services across the US, influenced by urbanization and distribution of healthcare professionals. The study underscores the need for targeted interventions to improve access to care and bridge gaps in pediatric ophthalmology service provision.

Effective low-cost pediatric vision screening by naive nonophthalmic examiners using the 'Arclight' device.

To explore whether a low-cost ophthalmoscope (Arclight) can be used by naive nonophthalmic examiners to effectively screen for pediatric eye disease. Fifty-four children (108 eyes) were examined by five medical students using an Arclight. Gold standard examination was performed by an ophthalmologist using a slit lamp and indirect ophthalmoscope. Examinations performed included ophthalmoscopy of the optic disc, estimation of the cup-to-disc ratio (CDR), corneal light reflex test (CRT), Bruckner's reflex test (BRT), and evaluation of refractive error. We determined the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) of the nonophthalmologist's Arclight exam compared to the gold standard findings of comprehensive evaluation by pediatric ophthalmologists. Using the Arclight, the optic nerve exam was successfully completed in 65% of patients. CDRs above and below 0.5 could be determined with 66.7% sensitivity and 84.4% specificity. Arclight CRT measurements were significant (P < .00001) predictors of strabismus, with 80% sensitivity, 95.1%, specificity, 80% PPV, and 95.1% NPV. BRT was not a significant predictor of amblyopia, with a 34.6% sensitivity, 85.7% specificity, 69.2% PPV, and 58.5% NPV. Refractive error was estimated with a success rate of 81% for emmetropia, 38% for myopia, and 21% for hyperopia. The Arclight ease-of-use was rated on average as 4.4 (SD = 0.9) on a scale of 1 to 5, with 1 being the hardest and 5 being the easiest. Our study shows the Arclight as an affordable and effective alternative to the traditional ophthalmoscope for assessing eye disease in children. This device can improve eye health services in under-resourced regions.

Evaluation of pediatric vision screening and digital referral routines in an interprofessional setting in Norway

Vision is crucial for childhood development, and ensuring good vision in children is one of the United Nation’s sustainability goals. Most countries have a childhood vision screening programme, and in Norway screening in children aged 4–5 years is performed in community health centres (CHC). Specialist health services such as ophthalmology and/or orthoptics are the referral bodies. However, access to these may be limited and they may be a long distance away from the child’s home, while optometrists are often more available and accessible. This study aims to investigate if vision screening reliably detects vision problems and to explore if using paediatric optometry as a referral body can relieve the specialist health services. The study also aims to report frequency of refractive errors and management of vision problems in this age group. Of 274 children who attended vision screening by school nurses at the CHC in Kongsberg, Norway, parents of 213 (77.7%) consented to a separate eye and vision examination by a paediatric optometrist. Agreements in screening results between school nurses and the paediatric optometrists were evaluated. Separately, an ophthalmologist and an orthoptist assessed records from the eye examinations through a digital communication tool (Eyecheck System AS). Agreements in diagnoses and management decisions between optometrists and the specialist health services were evaluated. Amblyopia or ocular pathology was found in 1.9% of the children, which were all identified by the vision screening. The vision screening had a sensitivity and specificity of 62.3% and 58.6%, respectively, for detecting other vision problems in need of treatment or follow-up. Hypermetropia was present in 82.7% of the children (58.0% low, 18.5% moderate, 6.5% high hypermetropia), 16.4% had emmetropia and 1.0% had myopia. Glasses were prescribed to 8.5% of the children and 16.4% were scheduled for follow-ups. There was a high level of agreement in management between optometrists and specialists (ophthalmologist 80.3%, orthoptist 81.7%). The vision screening reliably detected amblyopia and ocular pathology, and most refractive errors were detected. The high degree of agreement between the three eye care professions suggests that paediatric optometrists can be used as the referral body for this age group. Availability of a digital communication tool provides support for the paediatric optometrists in their decision making and can help relieve the specialist health services by providing children with an eye examination and vision correction earlier and more easily.

Critical appraisal of Australian and New Zealand paediatric vision screening clinical practice guidelines using the AGREE II tool

ABSTRACT Clinical Relevance Vision disorders in children impact health-related quality of life, with early detection and intervention improving outcomes and educational performance. Eye health professionals should be aware of paediatric vision screening guidelines and their development to understand the components of local programmes and the differences in sensitivity and specificity between protocols. Background High-quality clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for vision screening enable the early detection of common vision disorders; however, they require rigorous development to ensure optimal accuracy in detecting vision disorders, enabling timely interventions. This study evaluated the quality of available vision screening CPGs on vision screening of children in Australia and New Zealand. Methods A systematic search of academic databases, guideline databases, professional associations and Google search engines was conducted to identify relevant paediatric vision screening CPGs. Four independent reviewers used the Appraisal of Guidelines, Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) instrument to assess the quality of individual guidelines and scores were aggregated and reported as the percentage of the total possible score across the six AGREE II domains: scope and purpose, stakeholder involvement, rigour of development, clarity of presentation, applicability, and editorial independence. Results Initial 2,999 items were evaluated, with seven guidelines included. AGREE-II quality score agreement ranged from 43.3% to 95.8%. All guidelines scored >60.0% in the scope and purpose, however, most had poor scores of <26.5% in the rigour of development and <3.3% in editorial independence domains. All guidelines recommended screening using measures of habitual distance vision. Conclusion Of the guidelines developed for use in Australia and New Zealand, most guidelines scored poorly when assessed against the AGREE II tool, because of lack of editorial independence and rigour of development. Paediatric vision screening guidelines should prioritise systematic review of literature to inform practice and include statements regarding competing interests.

Vision Screenings and Ophthalmology Referrals Among a Sample of Pediatricians in Florida.

Introduction In Florida, mandated school vision screenings begin around the age of five.However, a joint statement in the ophthalmology community recommends that primary care providers, including pediatricians, screen for eye and vision symptoms and signs starting at birth. This suggests that pediatricians may be the first to catch signs of early vision loss and refer pediatric patients to an ophthalmologist. This study aims to understand the current vision screening practices of a sample of pediatricians in Florida and how comfort levels with vision screenings may impact ophthalmology referrals. Methods A survey with 36 questions was created by the authors of the study and sent to pediatricians through digital newsletters to the Florida Chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics and pediatric departments at Florida universities. Descriptive statistics were gathered regarding the demographics of pediatricians surveyed, vision screening attitudes and practices, vision concerns and ophthalmology referrals from pediatric clinics, and the most common reasons for referral to an ophthalmologist. The Jonckheere-Terpstra nonparametric trend test was used to examine whether decreased comfort performing vision screening on a child was associated with lower rates of urgent referrals to an optometrist or ophthalmologist. Results Forty-six responses were collected. Seventy-eight percent of pediatricians reported performing early childhood vision screening (n=36). There was considerable variability in vision screening practices among the pediatricians studied, with only 66% beginning screenings from zero to twoyears of age (n=24). Fifty percent of respondents reported receiving no previous training on performing vision screening, and less than half of respondents reported feeling "somewhat comfortable" or "extremely comfortable" with performing the exam (n=22, 48%).The trend between decreased comfort performing pediatric vision screening and lower rates of urgent eye care referrals was approaching statistical significance (p=0.0705).The majority of urgent referrals were provided by respondents who were somewhat or extremely comfortable with screening (n=13, 65%). Conclusion From this sample of pediatricians in Florida, most respondents reported performing early childhood vision screening, but there was notable variability in the way screenings were performed among pediatricians. Moreover,many had never received training on performing the exam or did not feel comfortable performing them. Decreased comfort with vision screenings was almost significantly associated with decreased urgent referrals to an ophthalmologist.Future studies should examine whether increased training on vision screenings may help improve standardizationof screening practices among pediatrics and comfort with vision screenings.

Association of Sociodemographic Characteristics with Pediatric Vision Screening and Eye Care: An Analysis of the 2021 National Survey of Children's Health

ObjectiveVision screening and regular eye care can help to detect and treat potentially irreversible vision impairment. This study aims to investigate the associations between sociodemographic and health characteristics and the receipt of eye care among children aged 17 and under in the United States. DesignThis cross-sectional study used data from the National Survey of Children's Health, a nationally representative and population-based survey of randomly sampled households. ParticipantsParticipants were children aged 0 to 17 years old, residing in all 50 states and the District of Columbia, whose caregivers or parents answered an address-based survey by mail or online. MethodsWeighted prevalence calculations were applied to analyze the data, and logistic regression was performed to explore associations between reported eye care and demographic, health, and parent-related variables. Main outcomes and measuresCaregiver-reported vision screenings, referral to an eye doctor after vision screening, eye doctor visits, and prescription of corrective lenses. ResultsCaregivers reported that 53.2% of children had a vision screening at least once (if child ≤ 5 years) or within the past 2 years (if child > 5 years). Of those screened, 26.9% were referred to an eye doctor. Overall, 38.6% of all children had a previous eye doctor visit, and among them, 55.4% were prescribed corrective lenses during the visit. Factors associated with decreased odds of vision screening included younger age, lack of health care visits, no insurance coverage, parent education ≤ high school, and lower household income. Non-White ethnicities, households with a non-English primary language, and lower incomes were more likely to be referred to an eye doctor after vision screening. Lower rates of eye doctor visits were associated with younger age, lack of insurance coverage, and primary household languages other than English. ConclusionsChildren from disadvantaged backgrounds are less likely to receive vision screening and eye care. Targeted strategies are needed to increase vision screening and access to eye care services in these vulnerable groups.

Impact of a Vision Photoscreener in Very Young Children in an Inner-City Pediatric Clinic in Detroit.

Pediatric vision screening is important because approximately 80% of visual impairments, including amblyopia, can be prevented or cured, especially if caught early. This retrospective study aims to determine whether the implementation of a machine photoscreener improves vision outcomes in 1- to 4-year-old children in an urban clinic. Before the vision screener, 91 patients were seen (control group), while 205 were seen following its implementation (study group). The number of children screened increased by 27.4% after implementing the photoscreener (57.1% study, 29.7% control, P < .001). All patients who failed the screening, 14.6% in the study period, were referred to ophthalmology (n = 30); 40% (n = 12) were evaluated, and 9 were diagnosed with a true vision abnormality. Instrument vision screening allows children as young as 1 year to be screened and allows for early intervention for potential vision-threatening pathologies in a vulnerable urban population.

Pediatric and School-Age Vision Screening in the United States: Rationale, Components, and Future Directions

Pediatric vision screening detects children at risk for visual conditions with the goal of connecting those in need with an eye care provider for evaluation and treatment. The primary aim for vision screening in younger children is the detection of those at risk for amblyopia, which can result in irreversible vision loss if left untreated. In older children, screening goals broaden to include the detection of risk for uncorrected refractive error. In the United States, professional organization guidelines and state-mandated requirements for vision screening vary widely across both the timing and components of screening. In this article, we describe the goals and components of pediatric vision screenings, current challenges, novel approaches to providing follow-up services through school-based vision programs, and future directions.

Barriers and facilitators of vision screening in the US pediatric primary care setting: a mixed methods systematic review protocol.

The objective of this review is to understand the barriers and facilitators of vision screening in the US primary care setting for children aged 3 to 17 years. Childhood vision screening is crucial because it detects children at risk of undiagnosed vision problems. Previous studies report low rates of appropriate vision screening in the primary care setting. We aim to identify barriers and facilitators of pediatric primary care vision screening to inform future interventions to improve childhood vision screening. Studies of all types that identify barriers and facilitators of vision screening in children aged 3 to 17 years in the pediatric primary care setting in the US will be considered for inclusion. We will search PubMed, CINAHL Complete (EBSCO), Scopus, Web of Science (SCI-EXPANDED, ESCI, CPCI-S, SSCI), Cochrane Library, and Embase. We will also search gray literature, including conference proceedings, professional organization reports, and clinical trials. We will use supplemental search strategies, including citation tracking and contacting authors for unpublished data. Titles and abstracts will be screened independently by 2 reviewers and selected for full-text screening based on prespecified inclusion criteria. Only studies in English will be considered. Each included study will be appraised using the mixed methods appraisal tool. Data will be extracted using a modified JBI mixed methods data extraction form. Qualitative and quantitative data will be integrated using a convergent integrated approach. Open Science Framework https://osf.io/nhf5d/.

Photoscreener: An effective tool for vision screening of preschool children in community setting

Background: Although studies compare the accuracy of spot photoscreeners, few evaluate photoscreeners in community settings. To our knowledge, all studies from India have been purely hospital based, particularly in children under 5 years. Aim: The aim was to evaluate the effectiveness of using a commercially available photoscreener for pediatric vision screening in a community setting. Settings and Design: This cross-sectional comparative study was conducted from December 2018 to February 2019 in a north-eastern district of Delhi. Methods: The automated Spot™ Vision Screener was used to screen the vision of preschoolers. A result displayed as “complete eye exam recommended” on the photoscreener was considered as screening positive and the child was referred to the pediatric ophthalmology unit of a tertiary eyecare institution, as per predefined international guidelines. Statistical Analysis: Referral rate and positive predictive value (PPV) of using the photoscreener were considered as primary outcome measures. Results: A total of 1205 children were screened using a photo-screener. Almost 16.4% of them were identified and referred a significantly higher referral rate than that in the historic control (2.7%, P < 0.001). Nearly 51.5% of the referred children reported to the unit. The PPV of pediatric eye screening done in a community setting by the photoscreener for refractive error (RE) was 81.4%. Fifty-nine percent of the children detected with REs were found to be at risk of amblyopia. Mean spherical equivalent, sphere, and cylinder of final glass prescription were significantly different from that of photoscreener refraction. Conclusion: Photoscreener improves the referral rate and has a high PPV. It could be a standard tool to screen preschoolers in community settings.

Availability of data for cost-effectiveness comparison of child vision and hearing screening programmes.

For cost-effectiveness comparison of child vision and hearing screening programmes, methods and data should be available. We assessed the current state of data collection and its availability in Europe. The EUSCREEN Questionnaire, conducted in 2017-2018, assessed paediatric vision and hearing screening programmes in 45 countries in Europe. For the current study, its items on data collection, monitoring and evaluation, and six of eleven items essential for cost-effectiveness analysis: prevalence, sensitivity, specificity, coverage, attendance and loss to follow-up, were reappraised with an additional questionnaire. The practice of data collection in vision screening was reported in 36% (N = 42) of countries and in hearing screening in 81% (N = 43); collected data were published in 12% and 35%, respectively. Procedures for quality assurance in vision screening were reported in 19% and in hearing screening in 26%, research of screening effectiveness in 43% and 47%, whereas cost-effectiveness analysis was performed in 12% for both. Data on prevalence of amblyopia were reported in 40% and of hearing loss in 77%, on sensitivity of screening tests in 17% and 14%, on their specificity in 19% and 21%, on coverage of screening in 40% and 84%, on attendance in 21% and 37%, and on loss to follow-up in 12% and 40%, respectively. Data collection is insufficient in hearing screening and even more so in vision screening: data essential for cost-effectiveness comparison could not be reported from most countries. When collection takes place, this is mostly at a local level for quality assurance or accountability, and data are often not accessible. The resulting inability to compare cost-effectiveness among screening programmes perpetuates their diversity and inefficiency.

Five-Year Trends in Pediatric Vision Screening and Access in the United States

Analyses of the National Survey of Children's Health (2016-2020) demonstrated a 9.4% decrease in the proportion of children receiving eye screening from a specialist with an 85.7% increase in unmet vision care after the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.

Rate of vision screening at well child checks for ages 3-5: optotype versus instrument based

Pediatric vision screening during well child checks is an integral part of determining a child's amblyopia risk. The screens are time consuming and technically difficult to perform, particularly for children ages 3-5, which can lead to a high rate of children who fail to receive a timely screen. We aim to compare the rate of successful vision screens performed with the SPOT instrument-based vision screener to traditional optotype-based visual acuity assessment. The rate of ophthalmology referral will also be evaluated.

Paediatric vision screening in Urban Lhasa from the Tibetan Plateau of Southwest China.

Few studies of vision screening in school-aged children were reported in Tibetan Plateau. We herein summarize the results of a mandatory vision screening conducted in young children in the Tibetan Plateau of Southwest China. The Lhasa Childhood vision Screening (LCVS) performed uncorrected distant visual acuity (UCVA) test on primary school students in urban Lhasa from July to September 2019. Pin-hole corrected VA (PCVA) was obtained for individuals with the UCVA less than 20/25. Decreased VA was defined for UCVA based on the American Academy of Pediatrics guidelines 2016 (UCVA < 20/32 for over 60 months). Visual impairment (VI), Mild VI, and moderate VI to blindness, defined as a PCVA less than 20/40, less than 20/40 to 20/63 and less than 20/63 in the better eye, respectively. Overall, 34,848 children aged 9.03 ± 1.87 years fulfilled the screening with a response rate of 98.5%. 18,412 (52.8%) of the participants were males, and 30,531(87.6%) were Tibetan. The prevalence of decreased VA, VI, Mild VI, and moderate VI to blindness was 35.6%, 4.4%, 3.5%, and 1.0%, respectively. The prevalence of decreased VA in grade 1-6 students was 28.8%, 20.8%, 26.9%, 40.7%, 50.8%, 59.5%, respectively. The prevalence of VI in grade 1 to 6 students was 1.5%, 1.4%, 2.4%, 5.6%, 7.7% and 9.9%, respectively. This study documented a relatively low prevalence of decreased VA and VI in Tibetan primary school students than other urban populations in China. An increasing trend of poor vision with grades was found.

Utilization and barriers to eye care following school-wide pediatric vision screening

ObjectifLe gouvernement ontarien lançait, en août 2018, le Protocole en matière de dépistage des problèmes de la vue et de santé visuelle chez les enfants, qui précise les modalités du dépistage des troubles visuels en milieu scolaire des enfants de la maternelle (4 à 6 ans). Nous avons examiné la prévalence des enfants à risque selon le dépistage réalisé dans une collectivité en Ontario et assuré un suivi afin de déterminer l'utilisation des ressources après le dépistage. MéthodesLes données sur le dépistage des troubles visuels (graphique oculaire HOTV, test stéréoscopique Randot, autoréfracteur) portaient sur 1127 enfants (41 écoles) examinés pendant les années scolaires 2018–2019 et 2019–2020. Un suivi téléphonique a été réalisé de 1 à 1,5 an après le dépistage afin de vérifier si un optométriste avait été consulté, si des lunettes avaient été prescrites et s'il existait des obstacles éventuels empêchant l'enfant d'avoir accès à des soins oculaires. Des tests t pour échantillons indépendants ont servi à comparer le délai avant le suivi entre les groupes, et le test du χ2 a été utilisé pour établir des liens entre la défavorisation matérielle et la défavorisation sociale. RésultatsLe dépistage s'est traduit par un taux d'orientation de 32,2 % dans notre région. D'après les enfants référés qui ont répondu, le taux de consultation d'un spécialiste de la vue après l'orientation s’élevait à 69,9 % (n = 64); 65,2 % de ces visites ont été motivées spécifiquement par le dépistage des troubles visuels; de plus, 34,4 % des enfants adressés à un spécialiste se sont fait prescrire des lunettes. On a noté un lien significatif entre le fait d’être adressé à un spécialiste et le fait de vivre dans un contexte plus défavorisé sur le plan matériel (p = 0,001) et sur le plan social (p = 0,006). Les obstacles les plus fréquents tenaient à une couverture d'assurance insuffisante en matière de soins oculaires ou d'achat de lunettes, à des problèmes en lien avec la COVID-19 et à des conflits d'horaire. ConclusionNotre programme de dépistage des troubles visuels a permis d'adresser plus du tiers des enfants qui ont fait l'objet d'un dépistage à un spécialiste en vue d'un examen de suivi; un plus grand nombre d'enfants provenant de quartiers défavorisés ont été adressés à un spécialiste. Environ les deux tiers des enfants adressés à un spécialiste ont consulté un médecin, et le tiers des sujets qui ont pris part à notre suivi se sont fait prescrire des lunettes.

Towards the development of a uniform screening guideline: Current status of paediatric vision screening in Abia State, Nigeria

Background: Vision screening is an important component of any child eye health system. Availability of standardised and broad screening guidelines is important to its success because it will allow for uniform and full utilisation of services through the system.Aim: This study aimed to evaluate the coverage, components, and referral criteria of the paediatric vision screening services in Abia State, Nigeria, towards the development of a uniform vision screening guideline.Methods: Eighty-three registered optometrists practising in Abia State for at least one year prior to the commencement of the study were invited to participate. Self-administered questionnaires were distributed directly or via email to the optometrists. The questionnaire covered areas such as the participation of optometrists in paediatric vision screening, coverage of the screening programmes, screening tools and referral criteria.Results: A response rate of 77.1% (64 participants) was recorded for the survey. Twenty-eight (43.8%) respondents offered more than one paediatric vision screening outside their practice in the last year before the survey. Among those respondents, 20 were from the private sector and 20 were based in urban cities. Only 10 respondents undertook more than four paediatric screening services within this period. Visual acuity measurement and ocular health assessment were the main components of the screening batteries of optometrists. While a child with any disease abnormality was referred for evaluation, the referral criteria for a full examination were inconsistent.Conclusion: The existing paediatric screening programmes in Abia State are inadequate. Of the few conditions that are screened for, varied referral criteria for further examination are applied. It therefore appears that the current screening programmes are not meeting the visual needs of the paediatric population and suggests the need for a new strategy to improve vision screening provisions to children in Abia State.

AAPOS uniform guidelines for instrument-based pediatric vision screen validation 2021

As instrument-based pediatric vision screening technology has evolved, the American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus (AAPOS) has developed uniform guidelines (2003, updated 2013) to inform the development of devices that can detect specified target levels of amblyopia risk factors (ARFs) and visually significant refractive error. Clinical experience with the established guidelines has revealed an apparent high level of over-referral for non-amblyopic, symmetric astigmatism, prompting the current revision. The revised guidelines reflect the expert consensus of the AAPOS Vision Screening and Research Committees. For studies of automated screening devices, AAPOS in 2021 recommends that the gold-standard confirmatory comprehensive examination failure levels include anisometropia >1.25 D and hyperopia >4.0 D. Astigmatism >3.0 D in any meridian and myopia <-3 D should be detected in children <48 months, whereas astigmatism >1.75 D and myopia < -2 D should be detected after 48 months. Any media opacity >1 mm and manifest strabismus of >8Δ should also be identified. Along with performance in detecting ARFs and refractive error, validation studies should also report screening instrument performance with regard to presence or absence of amblyopia. Instrument receiver operating characteristic curves and Bland-Altman analysis are suggested to improve comparability of validation studies. Examination failure criteria have been simplified and the threshold for symmetric astigmatism raised compared to the 2013 guidelines, whereas the threshold for amblyogenic anisometropia has been decreased. After age 4 years, lower magnitudes of symmetric astigmatism and myopia are also targeted despite a low risk of amblyopia, because they can influence school performance and may warrant consideration of myopia prevention therapy.

Pediatric Vision Development and Screening

Pediatric Vision Development and Screening

Implementation of paediatric vision screening in urban and rural areas in Cluj County, Romania

BackgroundIn 2018 and 2019, paediatric vision screening was implemented in Cluj County, Romania, where universal paediatric vision screening does not yet exist. We report on the preparation and the first year of implementation.MethodsObjectives, target population and screening protocol were defined. In cities, children were screened by kindergarten nurses. In rural areas, kindergartens have no nurses and children were screened by family doctors’ nurses, initially at the doctors’ offices, later also in rural kindergartens.CME-accredited training courses and treatment pathways were organised.Implementation was assessed through on-site observations, interviews, questionnaires and analysis of screening results of referred children.ResultsOut of 12,795 eligible four- and five-year-old children, 7,876 were screened in 2018. In the cities, kindergarten nurses screened most children without difficulties. In Cluj-Napoca 1.62x the average annual birth rate was screened and in the small cities 1.64x. In the rural areas, however, nurses of family doctors screened only 0.49x the birth rate. In 51 out of 75 rural communes, no screening took place in the first year. Of 118 rural family doctors’ nurses, 51 had followed the course and 26 screened children. They screened only 41 children per nurse, on average, as compared to 80 in the small cities and 100 in Cluj-Napoca. Screening at rural kindergartens met with limited success. These are attended by few children because of low population density, parents working abroad or children being kept at home in case of bad weather and road conditions.ConclusionsThree times fewer children were screened in rural areas as compared to urban areas. Kindergartens in rural areas are too small to employ nurses and family doctors’ nurses do not have easy access to many children and have competing healthcare priorities: there are 1.5x as many family doctors in urban areas as compared to rural areas. For nationwide scaling-up of vision screening, nurses should be enabled to screen a sufficient number of children in rural areas.