Performance of the Spot vision screener for the detection of amblyopia risk factors in children

Measurement Accuracy When Using Spot Vision Screener With or Without Cycloplegia in Young Adults

Purpose

There are many unclear points about the accuracy of measurement of cycloplegic refraction using the Spot Vision Screener (SVS). This study aimed to investigate the accuracy of SVS measurements with cycloplegia for myopia.

Materials and Methods

Forty-nine healthy subjects were included, and refraction was measured. Objective refractions were measured by SVS, table-mounted autorefractometer (RT7000), and handheld autorefractometer (Retinomax Screeen) at noncycloplegic and cycloplegic conditions by 1% cyclopentolate. Subjective noncycloplegic refraction was obtained by a visual acuity and refraction test performed by certified orthoptists using a cross-cylinder. One-way repeated-measures analysis of variance was used to examine whether the measured refractions fluctuate due to different reflection tests.

Results

In the noncycloplegic condition, the mean (±standard deviation) spherical equivalent (SE) measured by subjective method, SVS, RT7000, and Retinomax Screeen were -2.56 ± 3.00, -2.62 ± 2.38, -3.05 ± 2.84, and -3.26 ± 2.97, respectively. The subjective SE and objective SE measured by SVS had significantly less myopic value than the objective SE measured by two autorefractometers (p < 0.001). In the cycloplegic condition, the mean (± standard deviation) SE measured by SVS, RT7000, and Retinomax Screeen were -2.07 ± 2.66, -2.62 ± 2.98, and -2.66 ± 3.02, respectively. The objective SE measured by SVS had significantly less myopic value than SEs measured using other methods (p < 0.001). In the cycloplegic condition, SVS showed a fixed error wherein the SE was more hyperopic than that with the subjective method and SVS had a proportional error.

Conclusion

In the measurement under cycloplegic conditions, use of an autorefractometer rather than a photorefractometer such as SVS was preferable.

Pattern and prevalence of eye disorders and diseases in school-aged children: findings from the Nationwide School Sight Sampling Survey in Armenia

Objective

This study aims to identify the prevalence of eye disorders and their causes among secondary schoolchildren aged 6–15 years old in Armenia, based on analysis of the Nationwide School Sight Sampling Survey.

Methods and Analysis

A two-stage proportionate stratified cluster sample was designed for the survey. 22 600 students were screened for visual acuity in schools; 5944 of them were selected for analysis as a nationally representative sample. Those with 20/40 or worse vision were referred to photoscreening and rapid ophthalmic assessment in schools and then were provided with vouchers for free comprehensive eye examination in eye clinics. Data were collected through data collection forms and analysed using SPSS V.23.

Results

While majority of the children (85%) had normal vision, 15% had a visual acuity ≤20/40. The prevalence of vision impairment (VI) in at least one eye was 9.7% and blindness in at least one eye was 0.05%. The prevalence of abnormal vision and VI was higher among girls and older children. VI was more prevalent in urban areas. The most common diagnoses were myopia (60%), astigmatism (33.7%), hyperopia (29.5%) and strabismus (3.8%).

Conclusion

Majority of the vision abnormalities and VI among schoolchildren are a result of refractive error and are treatable. Our results highlight the importance of regular eye examinations for schoolchildren to detect and prevent VI. Raising awareness among parents, school staff and children about eye health is vital.

Effectiveness of a photoscreener in identifying undiagnosed unilateral amblyopia at vision screening of 3-year-old children in Japan

PURPOSE

In Japan a basic preparatory ophthalmic examination is routinely performed for 3-year-old children. This study aimed to determine the value of incorporating a photoscreener into the examination and evaluate parents' satisfaction with the photoscreener examination.

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective study.

METHODS

Children aged 42-47 months in Nagasaki City, Japan, underwent a visual acuity test by a parent at home and by automated vision screening using a photoscreener at their local municipal health center between October 2018 and March 2019. Subjects were children referred to Nagasaki University Hospital for examination after failing either test. Children previously diagnosed with strabismus and/or amblyopia were excluded. A questionnaire survey evaluated the level of satisfaction with the photoscreener-based screening by parents who attended these examinations at the local municipal health center.

RESULTS

Of children who completed the two tests, 52 (failed visual acuity test, 3; failed photoscreener examination, 49) were referred for examination. Of the 49 photoscreener failures, 12 were diagnosed with amblyopia: unilateral amblyopia with anisometropic hyperopia in 10 (83.3%), and bilateral amblyopia with astigmatism and hyperopia in 2 (16.7%). The photoscreener detected all 12 cases of amblyopia, whereas the home-based visual acuity test detected only two cases. More than 80% of 1035 parents were satisfied with the photoscreener examination.

CONCLUSION

Unilateral amblyopia with anisometropic hyperopia was easily overlooked with the home-based test but was detectable by photoscreener examination. The photoscreener proved to be an effective screening tool for amblyopia in children and was considered a satisfactory examination by a high proportion of parents.

Can photoscreening effectively detect amblyogenic risk factors in children with neurodevelopmental disability?

Purpose:

To analyze whether photoscreening can effectively detect amblyogenic risk factors in children with neurodevelopmental disability.

Methods:

A prospective study of 52 children attending a special school for children with neurodevelopmental disability from December 2017 to May 2018. All were initially tested with a photoscreening device: Welch Allyn® Spot® Vision Screener: model VS100 (Spot®) and further evaluated at a later date by a pediatric ophthalmologist, with a complete ocular evaluation including squint assessment, cycloplegic retinoscopy, and dilated fundus examination. The key parameters studied were demographic features, type of neurodevelopmental disability, refraction, ocular alignment, media clarity, any other ocular morbidity, and time taken for examination. The presence of amblyogenic risk factors (ARF) was analyzed as per the 2013 guidelines of the American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus.

Results:

The mean age was 10.5 years (range: 1–17.5 years). Males (73.1%) outnumbered females (26.9%). The most common neurodevelopmental disability was cerebral palsy. Simple myopic astigmatism was the most common type of refractive error. Presence of ARF in our study was 73.1%. The sensitivity and specificity of photoscreening in detecting ARF were 96.5% and 63.61%, respectively, with a positive predictive value of 80% and negative predictive value of 92.31%. The predictive ability of photoscreening was 79.9% as per the area under curve. The average time taken for photoscreening was less than 60 s.

Conclusion:

Photoscreening can detect ARF with high sensitivity and reasonable specificity and is a handy, useful, and time-saving tool in screening children with neurodevelopmental disability.

Photoscreener results with and without cycloplegia and their reliability according to biometric parameters

PURPOSE

Our goal in this study is to compare the results of a photoscreener (Plusoptix A12C) with and without cycloplegia and to investigate its reliability as a function of biometric parameters.

METHODS

In total, 250 eyes of 125 children with a mean age of 6.77±1.59years were included in the study. The results of cycloplegic and noncycloplegic Plusoptix A12C measurements and autorefractometer with cycloplegia (CA) were compared. The spherical equivalent (SE) differences between CA and noncycloplegic Plusoptix A12C measurements (NPO) with CA and cycloplegic Plusoptix A12C measurements (CPO) were compared with axial length (AL), anterior chamber depth (ACD), corneal radius of curvature (CR), mean keratometry (meanK) and axial length/corneal radius of curvature ratio (AL/CR) values. The relationships between these were examined.

RESULTS

According to amblyopia risk factors (ARFs) based on the criteria in the 2013 AAPOS guidelines, 33 eyes (13%) in the NPO results and 34 eyes (13.6%) in the CPO results were found to be at risk for amblyopia. According to the CA results, the NPO had 67.3% sensitivity and 94.5% specificity, and the CPO 69.4% sensitivity and 89.1% specificity in detecting the values of refractive amblyopia factors determined by the AAPOS. In regard to refraction values determined by the AAPOS for amblyopia, according to CA results, the NPO had 71.4% sensitivity and 88.4% specificity in detecting myopia; 33.3% sensitivity and 93.6% specificity in detecting hyperopia; and 79.4% specificity and 71.2% sensitivity in detecting astigmatism. With regard to refraction values determined by the AAPOS for amblyopia, according to CA results, the CPO had 80.9% sensitivity and 90% specificity in detecting myopia; 13.3% sensitivity and 89.2% specificity in detecting hyperopia; and 44.9% sensitivity and 30.8% specificity in detecting astigmatism. When the SE differences between the CA and NPO values were compared with biometric parameters, a negative correlation was observed with ACD, AL, and especially AL/CR ratio.

CONCLUSION

Both the NPO and CPO showed moderate sensitivity and high specificity in detecting ARFs based on the criteria in the 2013 AAPOS guidelines. Sensitivity for detecting hyperopic risk factors was lower than for myopia and astigmatism. The CPO has no additional clinical advantage. A negative correlation was found between biometric parameters and NPO results. Thus, the NPO is more reliable in myopic children with higher axial lengths, deeper anterior chambers, and increased AL/CR ratios.

Community based vision screening in preschool children; performance of the Spot Vision Screener and optotype testing

BACKGROUND

Children's vision screening children commonly uses optotype-based visual acuity or instrument-based methods measuring amblyogenic risk factors (ARFs).

OBJECTIVE

To compare the performance of the Spot Vision Screener (SVS) (PediaVision, Welch Allyn, NY) and a nurse-administered visual acuity screen (NVAS) in identifying ARFs and decreased visual acuity.

METHODS

A prospective, cross-sectional population-based study of preschool children in South-East Queensland, Australia. Eligible participants had both forms of screening by trained community nurses. All children with an abnormal result by either method as well as a cohort of randomly selected children who passed both assessments were assessed at a tertiary paediatric ophthalmology clinic.

RESULTS

Over a 10 month period, 2237 children (mean age; 64.4 ± 4.0 months) were screened from 38 schools. 6.4% of children failed SVS and 8.3% failed NVAS (with 3.8% overlap, failing both). The positive predictive value (PPV) in identifying either ARFs and/or reduced VA for the SVS and NVAS was 70.4% (95% Confidence Interval (CI): 61.6%-78.2%) and 60.5% (95% CI: 52.6%-67.9%) respectively. Highest PPV to detect either ARFs and/or reduced VA was achieved by a 'hybrid' method by combining failed NVAS and failed SVS: 91.0% (95% CI: 82.4 to 96.3) but this would risk children with sight impairment being missed in the community.

CONCLUSION

To our knowledge, this is the first population-based study providing detailed comparative measures of diagnostic accuracy for NVAS and SVS in preschool children. One in ten preschool children failed one or both screens. A number of children who required ophthalmic intervention were missed if only one screening method was utilized.

Agreement and diagnostic accuracy of vision screening in preschool children between vision technicians and spot vision screener

Purpose

Screening preschool children for vision-related disorders poses a challenge. This study is designed to determine the agreement and diagnostic accuracy of the spot vision screener (SVS) in screening preschool children compared to screening procedure by vision technicians (VT).

Methods

This study was conducted as a part of the ongoing study titled "Initiative for Screening Children for Refractive Errors and other Eye Health Needs (I-SCREEN)." Children from 33 Anganwadis (preschools) in two districts, Adilabad district of Telangana and Krishna district of Andhra Pradesh, in South India, underwent eye health screening by a VT and by a trained community eye health workers (CEHW) using the SVS. Findings were compared for agreement and diagnostic accuracy of assessment.

Results

A total of 976 preschool children were screened by the VT and separately by the CEHW using the SVS in Adilabad (15 schools) and Krishna (18 schools) districts. The overall mean age of these children was 2.5 years (SD ± 1.3 years). There were 48 (4.9%) referrals by VT compared to 105 (10.8%) referrals by CEHW using SVS. The overall sensitivity of SVS was 91.7% (95% CI: 80%-97.7%) and the specificity was 93.4% (95% CI: 91.6%-94.9%). Positive predictive value was 41.9% (95% CI: 32.3%-51.9%) and negative predictive value was 99.5% (95% CI: 98.8%-99.9%) with a moderate agreement (0.54; 95% CI 0.49-0.64) between VT screening and screening with SVS.

Conclusion

The SVS showed good diagnostic accuracy and agreement in screening for possible vision-related disorders in preschool children.

Instrument-based screening for amblyopia risk factors in a primary care setting in children aged 18 to 30 months

Amblyopia is the leading cause of vision impairment in children, and its early detection can avoid irreversible consequences for a child's visual ability. In this prospective study, to detect amblyopia risk factors, we examined patients aged 18 to 30 months in primary care settings. Patients were referred to an ophthalmologist for confirmation. The main aims were to detect amblyogenic risk factors and to assess the usefulness of a photoscreener in such settings. Out of 453 patients, 42 (9.3%) presented visual alterations according to the photoscreener, with astigmatism being the most common. The instrument had good sensitivity (89%) and specificity (91%), with a positive predictive value of 76% and a negative predictive value of 96%. Overall, 38% of the patients required follow-up, and 47% needed glasses. The automated screening device allowed these children to be diagnosed at an early stage.Conclusions: The use of a photoscreener to screen 2-year-old children in primary care settings was helpful and accurate. What is Known: • Early detection of amblyopic risk factors is important to avoid vision defects. However, it is very difficult to measure visual acuity using visual charts in children younger than 4 years old. What is New: • Instrument-based screening in children aged 18 to 30 months allows excellent detection of early amblyopia risk factors in primary care settings.

Analysis of suspected visual impairment risks based on objective refraction in 3-year-old children

PURPOSE

To evaluate the relationship between uncorrected visual acuity and non-cycloplegic refractive value among 3-year-old children in a vision screening program in Japan.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective, cross-sectional study.

METHODS

The participants were 1746 Japanese children screened from April 2009 to July 2018, and ranged in age from 36 to 47 months. Visual acuity and handheld refractive values were collected from the clinical records of 3-year-old children in a vision screening program. Multiple logistic regression analysis was used to evaluate the association between 0.3 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) and > 0.3 logMAR. Correlation analysis was also performed for the presence of myopic shift.

RESULTS

Among the 1746 children (aged [mean ± standard deviation], 37.6 ± 1.6 months; percentage of boys, 50.4%), representing 3492 eyes, 116 eyes (3.3%) had > 0.3 logMAR. Multiple logistic regression analysis revealed that the risk factors for 1.75-2.00 diopter (D) spherical power (odds ratio [OR], 2.51; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.12-5.64; P = 0.026) and 1.25-1.50 D cylindrical power (OR, 5.66; 95% CI 1.58-20.40; P < 0.01) were increased in eyes with > 0.3 logMAR. There was no myopic shift for 10 years (Spearman's rank correlation coefficient; P = 0.65).

CONCLUSION

It is important to set a threshold that comprises the characteristics of the autorefractor used in screening, and to ensure that, to help prevent amblyopia a thorough eye examination in ophthalmic institutions will be conducted taking into account population-based refractive values.

School-based epidemiology study of myopia in Tianjin, China

PURPOSE

To study the epidemiology of myopia in school-aged children in Tianjin and the relationship between visual acuity-based screening and refraction-based screening.

METHOD

This school-based prospective cohort study was performed on children from 42 elementary schools and 17 middle schools in Tianjin, China. Totally 14,551 children, ages ranging from 5 to 16 years, were included in this study. Uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA) was determined by logarithmic tumbling E chart. Non-cycloplegic photorefraction was examined by the Spot (v2.1.4) photoscreener. The relationship between the UCVA and refractive error was investigated for different age groups.

RESULTS

The overall prevalence of myopia at this school based screen is 78.2%, ranged from 10% at age of 5 to 95% at age of 16. The most dramatic increase in prevalence is from age of 6 (14.8%) to age of 7 (38.5%). The overall prevalence of high myopia is 2.5%. UCVA is found corresponding to spherical equivalent refraction (SER) in a manner of normal distribution and is significantly affected by age. When using UCVA to estimate the prevalence of myopia, the overall sensitivity and specificity are 0.824 and 0.820, respectively. Age-dependent optimal cutoff points and 95% confident intervals of such estimation are reported.

CONCLUSIONS

Myopia is heavily affecting school-aged children in Tianjin, China. The refraction screening is preferable for myopia screening, whereas the UCVA screening results need to be interpreted in an age-dependent manner for myopia estimation.

Evaluation of the Spot Vision Screener in School-Aged Children

PURPOSE

To determine the accuracy of the Spot Vision Screener (Welch Allyn, Skaneateles Falls, NY) in children 6 years and older and recommend device thresholds to improve its accuracy for the detection of refractive error.

METHODS

The Spot Vision Screener results were compared with three gold standard conditions of increasingly narrow refractive error criterion. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of the Spot Vision Screener in detecting each gold standard criterion were calculated. The most accurate threshold setting for each parameter was identified by calculating the area under the curve receiver operating characteristic.

RESULTS

The Spot Vision Screener was able to successfully evaluate 313 of 330 children (95%). The sensitivity of the Spot Vision Screener to detect American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus guidelines for amblyopia risk factors was 89.5% and the specificity was 76.7%. The sensitivity decreased to 80% and the specificity increased to 75.3% with narrower refractive criteria. The sensitivity in detecting refractive criteria improved with the proposed optimized device thresholds. Estimates for the general population indicate that the positive predictive value is reasonable at 52.3% to 61.8%, depending on the stringency of the criteria, with excellent negative predictive values.

CONCLUSIONS

In school-aged children, the primary screening focus shifts from preventing amblyopia to detecting visual disturbances, including refractive error, that may interfere with academic performance. In this age group, the Spot Vision Screener was an acceptable method of detecting significant refractive error with improved sensitivity with threshold optimization. [J Pediatr Ophthalmol Strabismus. 2020;57(3):146-153.].

Evaluation of the Spot Vision Screener in comparison with the orthoptic examination in visual screening in 3-5 year-old schoolchildren

PURPOSE

To evaluate the Spot Vision Screener (SVS) compared with the orthoptic examination for detection of amblyopia risk factors in preschools.

METHODS

This prospective study included children with a visual screening organized by the department of "le" (PMI) in Côte d'Or (Burgundy, France), between June 2017 and April 2018. All children were evaluated with the SVS followed by a clinical orthoptic examination. Results with the SVS were compared with those obtained by clinical orthoptic examination.

RESULTS

A total of 1236 subjects were included in the study from 100 preschools. The mean age of the children was 3.6±0.7 years, and 627 were female (50.7%). The orthoptic examination detected 308 (24.9%) children with subnormal visual acuity for age in one eye or both. In children with a history of prematurity, the orthoptic examination was more frequently abnormal (P=0.002), which was not seen with the SVS (P=0.050). The SVS screened 20 (1.6%) children with strabismus, while 40 (3.2%) were detected by orthoptic examination. At the end of the screening, the SVS detected 182 (14.7%) suspect patients while 311 (25.1%) suspect patients were detected after the orthoptic examination. Comparing SVS with orthoptic examination, agreement was fair (κ=0.4).

CONCLUSION

The SVS can be a useful device for visual screening, but agreement with the orthoptic examination was only fair. The Spot vision screener should be used in conjunction with a clinical orthoptic examination.

Accuracy of noncycloplegic photorefraction using Spot photoscreener in detecting amblyopia risk factors in preschool children in an Indian eye clinic

Purpose:

To evaluate the accuracy of Spot photoscreener (PS) as a noncycloplegic photorefractor in detecting amblyopia risk factors (ARFs) in preschool children in an Indian eye clinic setting. Also, to derive appropriate cutoff values for screening to obtain maximum sensitivity and specificity of the device in detecting ARF.

Methods:

This was a cross-sectional study conducted in the outpatient pediatric eye clinic at a tertiary eye care institute. A Spot PS was used to screen all the children between the ages of 6 months and 5 years that presented to the eye clinic from August 2018 to October 2018. This screening was followed by a complete eye examination, including cycloplegic refraction by a masked examiner. The 2013 American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus (AAPOS) guidelines were considered the standard cutoff values for clinically significant refractive error in children younger than 5 years of age.

Results:

The study comprised of 219 children. The Spot PS diagnosed 135 (61.64%) children with ARF as compared with 124 (56.62%) children detected by clinic examination. For ARF detection, the Spot photoscreeneer had 85.48% sensitivity, 69.47% specificity, 78.52% positive predictive value and 78.57% negative predictive value. The sensitivity for detection of strabismus and hypermetropia was very low (42% and 36%, respectively). The 95% limits of agreement ranged from −5.48 to +5.59 diopters (D) with a bias of 0.06 D for spherical equivalent between noncycloplegic photorefraction and cycloplegic refraction.

Conclusion:

The Spot PS may be used as a screening tool to detect ARF in children younger than 5 years of age keeping its limitations in consideration. However, the performance can be improved by modifying the cutoff values for the referral.

Diagnostic test accuracy of Spot and Plusoptix photoscreeners in detecting amblyogenic risk factors in children: a systemic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Amblyopia is a permanent visual impairment developed in early childhood. Recently, instrument-based photoscreeners have been widely used for vision screening to detect amblyopia risk factors, which is key for the prevention and treatment of amblyopia. This meta-analysis aims to evaluate the diagnostic test accuracy of Spot and Plusoptix photoscreeners in detecting risk factors for amblyopia in children.

METHODS

An electronic literature search was performed in October 2018 using the MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science databases. Twenty-one publications with a total of 5022 subjects were included. Subjects given a comprehensive examination were considered to have amblyopia or amblyogenic risk factors based on the American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus (AAPOS) referral criteria guidelines.

RESULTS

The overall sensitivity for Spot and Plusoptix was 87.7% and 89.4%, respectively (p = 0.38); the specificity was 78.0% and 89.9%, respectively (p = 0.90). For subjects under 7 years old (preschool children), the overall sensitivity for Spot and Plusoptix was 91.7% and 90.2%, respectively (p = 0.81); the specificity was 82.6% and 93.0%, respectively (p = 0.46).

CONCLUSION

Both Spot and Plusoptix photoscreeners demonstrated good sensitivity and specificity in detecting amblyopia risk factors in children, especially at preschool ages. There was no significant difference in diagnostic test accuracy between them.

Astigmatism Associated with Allergic Conjunctivitis in Urban School Children

Introduction

We first examined the association of an ocular refractive error with allergic conjunctivitis in school children and then examined this association in children attending a suburban school and an urban school.

Methods

We enrolled 426 children attending a primary school in a suburban area and 550 children attending a primary school in an urban area which had a higher level of air pollution. Allergic conjunctivitis was defined as the diagnosis of this condition at any time during a child's life. The ophthalmic examinations included measurements of visual acuity and refraction, and a slit lamp examination. Skin prick tests were also performed at each school during 2018. The significance of associations was determined by the calculation of odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

Results

Astigmatism (increase of 1 cylindrical diopter) was associated with allergic conjunctivitis in children overall (OR = 1.287, 95% CI = 1.010 to 1.642) and in children attending the urban school (OR = 1.408, 95% CI = 1.029 to 1.926), but not in children attending the suburban school (OR = 1.040, 95% CI = 0.672 to 1.610). Allergic conjunctivitis also had a higher prevalence among children attending the urban school. The urban school had higher levels of air pollutants than the suburban school. Skin prick tests indicated that the major allergens in children with allergic conjunctivitis were house dust mites and various types of pollen.

Conclusion

Astigmatism is associated with allergic conjunctivitis in children attending an urban school.

Refraction and pupil diameter in 3-year- and 1-month-old children as measured by Spot Vision Screener

Spot Vision Screener (SVS) can conduct refraction tests for both eyes within a short period. This study aims to evaluate the refraction and pupil diameters of 3-year- and 1-month-old Japanese children using SVS in regular medical checkup. We examined 2438 eyes of 1219 children (age: 3-year- and 1-month) in Fujieda (Shizuoka, Japan) to assess their refraction and pupil diameters and eye-position screening conducted by SVS. SVS successfully measured 1217 children (99.8%). Regarding the right eye refraction, the spherical power was +0.70 ± 0.55 D (median, +0.75 D), and the cylindrical power was −0.67 ± 0.49 D (median, −0.50 D). The pupil diameter of the right eyes was 5.57 ± 0.79 (median, 5.60) mm. we could obtain a large number of basic data for 3-year- and 1-month-old Japanese children. However, refraction and pupil diameter of children were not normally distributed, so careful handling of children’s basic data on the eye is necessary.

Choosing appropriate tools and referral criteria for vision screening of children aged 4-5 years in Canada: a quantitative analysis

OBJECTIVES

To assess the diagnostic accuracy of five vision screening tools used in a school setting using sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV).

DESIGN

We compared the results of the five best evidence-based screening tools available in 2014 to the results of a comprehensive eye exam with cycloplegic refraction by a licenced optometrist. Screening included Cambridge Crowded Acuity Cards, Plusoptix S12 and Spot photoscreeners, Preschool Randot Stereoacuity Test and the Pediatric Vision Scanner (PVS). Referral criteria followed AAPOS (2013) guidelines and published norms.

SETTING

A large school in Toronto, Canada, with 25 split classrooms of junior kindergarten (JK: 4 year olds) and senior kindergarten (SK: 5 year olds) children.

PARTICIPANTS

Over 2 years, 1132 eligible children were enrolled at the school. After obtaining parental consent, 832 children were screened. Subsequently, 709 children had complete screening and optometry exam data.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The presence/absence of a visual problem based on optometrist's assessment: amblyopia, amblyopia risk factors (reduced stereoacuity, strabismus and clinically significant refractive errors) and any other ocular problem (eg, nystagmus).

RESULTS

Overall, 26.5% of the screened children had a visual problem, including 5.9% with amblyopia. Using all five tools, screening sensitivity=84% (95% CI 78 to 89), specificity=49% (95% CI 44 to 53), PPV=37% (95% CI 33 to 42), and NPV=90% (95% CI 86 to 93). The odds of having a correct screening result in SK (mean age=68.2 months) was 1.5 times those in JK (mean age=55.6 months; 95% CI 1.1 to 2.1), with sensitivity improved to 89% (95% CI 80 to 96) and specificity improved to 57% (95% CI 50 to 64) among SK children.

CONCLUSIONS

A school-based screening programme correctly identified 84% of those kindergarten children who were found to have a visual problem by a cyclopleged optometry exam. Additional analyses revealed how accuracy varies with different combinations of screening tools and referral criteria.

Refractive Status and Amblyopia Risk Factors in Chinese Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder

Amblyopia risk factors in children with autism spectrum disorders (ASD) are usually hard to detect in early childhood due to poor cooperation and has not been reported in the Chinese population. We screened 168 Chinese children with ASD, aged between 3 and 8 years, and 264 age-matched neurotypical children with Spot photoscreener and basic ophthalmologic examinations. Children with ASD were found to have normal refractive status but significantly higher incidence of strabismus (16.1%), compared with control children (1.5%) (p < 0.01). Most of the cases of strabismus found in children with ASD were classified as esodeviation. Strabismus in children with ASD should be considered more seriously as an amblyopia risk factor by ophthalmologists and other healthcare professionals.

Refractive error of Saudi children enrolled in primary school and kindergarten measured with a spot screener

AIMS

To evaluate the refractive status of young Saudi schoolchildren with a "Spot Screener."

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

This cross-sectional study was conducted from January to July 2016 in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Children of kindergarten (3-5 years) and grades 1 and 2 (6-7 years) were screened for refractive error (RE) using the handheld Spot Screener (Welch Allyn, Skaneateles Falls, NY, USA). Data were collected on age, gender, and spectacle use. The pass/fail notation from the Spot Screener and the RE were documented. Children with a "fail" were re-tested with an autorefractor (AR). The rate of agreement was evaluated for the spherical equivalent (SE) from the Spot Screener and AR.

RESULTS

We examined 300 schoolchildren and 114 preschool children. The prevalence of RE was 22% in schoolchildren and 25% in preschoolers. There were 183 (61%) hyperopes, 110 (36.7%) myopes, 6 (2%) emmetropes, and 29 (9.7%) astigmats (>2 D cylinder) in grade 1 and 2. There were 85 (74.6%) hyperopes, 22 (19.3%) myopes, 7 (6.1%) emmetropes, and 10 (8.8%) astigmats among preschoolers. The SE differed between the AR and the Spot Screener in 17 (28%) children of 61 failed Spot Screener tests. Accommodation (9, 53%) and high astigmatism (8, 47%) were the main underlying causes of the difference. The Spot Screener could identify RE for the first time in 51 (17%) schoolchildren and 26 (22%) preschoolers. End-users suggested that Spot Screener was child-friendly and quick to test RE.

CONCLUSIONS

The Spot Screener could be a good initial screening tool for RE in young schoolchildren.

Effect of Instrument-Based Vision Screening for 3- to 5-Year-Old Children on Referrals to Eye Care Specialists

Recently, several professional groups have recommended a change from chart-based to instrument-based screening for preschool-age children, but the effect of this change on health care utilization is unknown. We performed a secondary analysis of a site-randomized quality improvement project on transitioning from chart-based to instrument-based vision screening for 3- to 5-year-old children in primary care. We analyzed visit rates to ophthalmologists and optometrists and costs of such care before and after implementation of instrument-based vision screening with comparison to nonparticipating practices. The implementation of instrument-based vision screening resulted in a decrease in visits to eye care specialists from 83.1 visits per 1000 children per year to 55.0, a reduction of 33.8%; no comparable reduction was seen in nonparticipating practices. The cost of services by eye care specialists fell from $65 715 per 1000 children per year prior to $55 740, a decline of 15.2%; similar costs among control practices rose 13.4%.

Preschool Vision Screening: Where We Have Been and Where We Are Going

PURPOSE

To discuss the evolution of instrument-based screening to detect amblyopia and its risk factors, and to summarize the importance of preschool vision screening.

DESIGN

Expert commentary.

METHODS

Author experiences were supplemented by a review and interpretation of pertinent medical literature.

RESULTS

Amblyopia remains a public health problem, as it is a common cause of monocular visual impairment. As a disease, amblyopia detection is best obtained by appropriate vision screening rather than by yearly mandated comprehensive eye examinations for all children; the US Preventative Services Task Force (USPSTF) recently reaffirmed their recommendations for vision screening in preschool children. Vision screening devices have evolved over the past 4 decades ranging from photoscreeners that use instantaneously developing film, to autorefractors that detect amblyopia risk factors, to nerve fiber layer scanners that detect the microtropia that nearly always accompanies amblyopia. When it is detected early, effective treatment for amblyopia can be initiated.

CONCLUSIONS

Amblyopia is a reversible cause of vision loss in children. Vision screening devices and screening programs have been extensively studied-experts and literature agree: vision screening devices and programs are cost-effective, are efficient, and are effective methods for amblyopia detection. The authors support the regular use of instrument-based vision screening in the medical home for all children until they reach a developmental stage where they can participate reliably in optotype-based vision screening.

Primary Care Implementation of Instrument-Based Vision Screening for Young Children

Vision screening for young children can detect conditions that may lead to amblyopia and vision loss if left untreated. Portable vision screening devices with high levels of precision are now available, but their effectiveness in busy primary care settings is unknown. We analyzed the effect of deploying instrument screening devices (SPOT Vision Screener, Welch-Allyn) in 19 pediatric practices. At baseline, using chart-based screening, 65.3% of 3- to 5-year-old children completed screening. A significant increase was observed starting 3 weeks after delivery of devices, and a stable level was reached 12 weeks after implementation, with 86.5% of children completing vision screening ( P = .007 by interrupted time series analysis). Improvement was greatest among 3-year-olds (44.0%-79.8%) but was also seen among 4-year-olds (70.9%-88.4%) and 5-year-olds (80.3%-90.8%). The deployment of vision screening devices in primary care practices substantially improved completed screening among preschool-aged children.

Compared performance of Spot and SW800 photoscreeners on Chinese children

Purpose

To evaluate the effectiveness of Spot photoscreener and SW800 vision screener in detecting amblyopia risk factors in Chinese children between 4 and 6 years of age.

Methods

One hundred and thirteen children (226 eyes) underwent complete ophthalmologic examination, cycloplegic retinoscopy refraction, prism cover tests and photoscreen using both Spot (v2.1.4) and SW800 (v1.0.1.0) photoscreeners. The agreement of results obtained from photoscreener and retinoscopy was evaluated by paired t-test as well as Pearson correlation test. The sensitivity and specificity of detecting amblyopia risk factors were calculated based on the American Association of Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus 2013 guidelines. The overall effectiveness of detecting amblyopia risk factors by using either photoscreener was analysed by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves.

Results

A strong linear agreement was observed between Spot and retinoscopy (p<0.01) in aspects of spherical equivalent (SE, Pearson’s r=0.95), dioptre sphere (DS, r=0.97), dioptre cylinder (DC, r=0.84) and horizontal deviation (Hdev, r=0.91), with overall −0.17 D myopic shift of SE. Significant correlation was also shown between SW800 and retinoscopy (p<0.01) in aspects of SE (r=0.90), DS (r=0.93), DC (r=0.82) and Hdev (r=0.80), with overall −0.12 D myopic shift of SE. The overall sensitivity and specificity in detecting amblyopia risk factors were 94.0% and 80.0% for Spot and 88.8% and 81.1% for SW800.

Conclusion

The measurements of Spot and SW800 photoscreener showed a strong agreement with cycloplegic retinoscopy refraction and prism cover tests. The performance of both screeners in detecting individual amblyopia risk factors is satisfactory. ROC analysis indicates that the Spot and SW800 performed very similarly in detecting amblyopia risk factors.

Performance of Photoscreener in Detection of Refractive Error in All Age Groups and Amblyopia Risk Factors in Children in a Tribal District of Odisha: The Tribal Odisha Eye Disease Study (TOES) # 3

PURPOSE

To evaluate effectiveness of Welch Allyn Spot Vision Screener in detecting refractive error in all age groups and amblyopia risk factors in children in a tribal district of India.

METHODS

All participants received dry retinoscopy and photorefraction; children also received cycloplegic retinoscopy. Statistical analysis included Bland-Altman and coefficient of determination (R2).

RESULTS

Photoscreener could not elicit a response in 113 adults and 5 children of 580 recruited participants. In Bland-Altman analysis mean difference of Spot screener spherical equivalent (SSSE) and dry retinoscopy spherical equivalent (DRSE) was 0.32 diopters (D) in adults and 0.18 D in children; this was an overestimation of hyperopia and underestimation of myopia. In Bland-Altman analysis of SSSE and cycloplegic retinoscopy spherical equivalent (CRSE) the mean difference was -0.30 D in children; this was an overestimation of myopia and underestimation of hyperopia. In regression analysis the relationship between SSSE and DRSE was poor in adults (R2 = 0.50) and good in children (R2 = 0.92). Cubic regression model for Spot versus cycloretinoscopy in children was: CRSE = 0.34 + 0.85 SSSE - 0.01 SSSE2 + 0.006 SSSE3. It was 87% accurate. Sensitivity and specificity of Spot in detecting amblyopia risk factors (2013 American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus [AAPOS] criteria) was 93.3% and 96.9% respectively. Sensitivity of Spot screener in detection of amblyopia was 72%.

CONCLUSIONS

Photoscreener has 87% accuracy in refraction in children. Its value could be used for subjective correction tests.

TRANSLATIONAL RELEVANCE

Photoscreening could complement traditional retinoscopy to address refractive error in children in a resource-limited facility region.

Effectiveness of the GoCheck Kids Vision Screener in Detecting Amblyopia Risk Factors

PURPOSE

The GoCheck Kids smartphone photoscreening app (Gobiquity Mobile Health, Scottsdale, Arizona, USA), introduced in 2014, is marketed to pediatricians with little published validation. We wished to evaluate the GoCheck Kids Screener for accuracy in detecting amblyopia risk factors (ARF) using 2013 American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus guidelines.

DESIGN

Validity assessment.

METHODS

Children 6 months to 6 years of age presenting from October 2016 to August 2017 were included. Children were screened with the GoCheck preloaded Nokia Lumia 1020, software version 4.6 with image processing version R4d, prior to undergoing a comprehensive eye examination by a pediatric ophthalmologist masked to the screener results. Determination of the presence of age-specific ARF was made based upon the examination and compared with the GoCheck recommendation.

RESULTS

A total of 206 children were included (average age 43 months). When compared to examination, GoCheck had a sensitivity of 76.0% and specificity of 67.2% in detecting ARF. Positive predictive value was 57.0% and negative predictive value 83.0%. The screener results of 13 children were changed from "no risk factors" to "risk factors identified" based on the GoCheck remote review process. Four images remained "not gradable" and screening was unsuccessful in 3 children.

CONCLUSION

In our high-risk population, this version of the Gocheck Kids smartphone app was useful in identifying ARF in children who are often not able to cooperate with visual acuity testing. This study informs pediatricians about the efficacy of this new screener as they make decisions about how to best detect vision problems in young children.

Performance of the Spot Vision Screener in Children Younger Than 3 Years of Age

PURPOSE

To evaluate the use of the Spot Vision Screener (Spot; Welch Allyn, Skaneateles Falls, New York, USA) for detection of amblyopia risk factors in children aged 6 months to 3 years, as defined by the 2013 guidelines of the American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus.

DESIGN

Reliability analysis.

METHODS

In this study, children seen from June 1, 2012, to April 30, 2016 were tested with the Spot during a routine visit. Enrolled children underwent a comprehensive eye examination including cycloplegic refraction and sensorimotor testing within 6 months of the testing date by a pediatric ophthalmologist masked to the Spot results.

RESULTS

A total of 184 children were included. The Spot successfully obtained readings in 89.7% of patients. Compared with the ophthalmologist's examination, the Spot had an overall sensitivity of 89.8% and a specificity of 70.4%.

CONCLUSION

The Spot achieved good sensitivity and specificity for detection of amblyopia risk factors in this young cohort, particularly in the older subgroup. Our data offer support for automated vision screening in young children.

Detecting High Hyperopia: The Plus Lens Test and the Spot Vision Screener

PURPOSE

To evaluate the usefulness of the Plus Lens (Goodlite Company, Elgin, IL) test and the Spot Vision Screener (Welch Allyn, Skaneateles Falls, NY) in detecting high hyperopia in a pediatric population.

METHODS

Between June and August 2015, patients were screened with the Spot Vision Screener and the Plus Lens test prior to a scheduled pediatric ophthalmology visit. The following data were analyzed: demographic data, Plus Lens result, Spot Vision Screener result, cycloplegic refraction, and examination findings. Sensitivity/specificity and positive/negative predictive values were calculated for the Plus Lens test and Spot Vision Screener in detecting hyperopia as determined by the "gold-standard" cycloplegic refraction.

RESULTS

A total of 109 children (average age: 82 months) were included. Compared to the ophthalmologist's cycloplegic refraction, the Spot Vision Screener sensitivity for +3.50 diopters (D) hyperopia was 31.25% and the specificity was 100%. The Plus Lens sensitivity for +3.50 D hyperopia was 43.75% and the specificity was 89.25%. Spot Vision Screener sensitivity increased with higher degrees of hyperopia.

CONCLUSIONS

In this preliminary study, the Plus Lens test and the Spot Vision Screener demonstrated moderate sensitivity with good specificity in detecting high hyperopia. [J Pediatr Ophthalmol Strabismus. 2017;54(3):163-167.].

Advantages, limitations, and diagnostic accuracy of photoscreeners in early detection of amblyopia: a review

Amblyopia detection is important to ensure proper visual development and avoid permanent decrease of visual acuity. This condition does not produce symptoms, so it is difficult to diagnose if a vision problem actually exists. However, because amblyopia treatment is limited by age, early diagnosis is of paramount relevance. Traditional vision screening (conducted in <3 years) is related with difficulty in getting cooperation from a subject to conduct the eye exam, so accurate objective methods to improve amblyopia detection are necessary. Handheld devices used for photoscreening or autorefraction could offer advantages to improve amblyopia screening because they reduce exploration time to just few seconds, no subject collaboration is needed, and they provide objective information. The purpose of this review is to summarize the main functions and clinical applicability of commercially available devices for early detection of amblyopia and to describe their differences, advantages, and limitations. Although the studies reviewed are heterogeneous (due to wide differences in referral criteria, use of different risk factors, different types of samples studied, etc), these devices provide objective measures in a quick and objective way with a simple outcome report: retest, pass, or refer. However, due to major limitations, these devices are not recommended, and their use in clinical practice is limited.

Performance of Spot Photoscreener in Detecting Amblyopia Risk Factors in Chinese Pre-school and School Age Children Attending an Eye Clinic

Purpose

To evaluate the effectiveness of Spot photoscreener in detecting amblyopia risk factors meeting 2013 the American Association of Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus (AAPOS) criteria in Chinese preschool and school-age children.

Methods

One hundred and fifty-five children (310 eyes), aged between 4 to 7 years (5.74 ± 1.2 years) underwent complete ophthalmologic examination, photoscreening, and cycloplegic retinoscopy refraction. The agreement of the results obtained with the photoscreening and retinoscopy was evaluated by linear regression and Bland-Altman plots. The sensitivity and specificity of detecting amblyopia risk factors were calculated based on the AAPOS 2013 guidelines. The overall effectiveness of detecting amblyopia risk factors was analyzed with Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curves.

Result

The mean refractive errors measured with the Spot were: spherical equivalent (SE) = 0.70 ± 1.99 D, J0 = 0.87 ± 1.01 D, J45 = 0.09 ± 0.60 D. The mean results from retinoscopy were: SE = 1.19 ± 2.22 D, J0 = 0.77 ± 1.00 D, J45 = -0.02 ± 0.45 D. There was a strong linear agreement between results obtained from those two methods (R² = 0.88, P<0.01). Bland–Altman plot indicated a moderate agreement of cylinder values between the two methods. Based on the criteria specified by the AAPOS 2013 guidelines, the sensitivity and specificity (in respective order) for detecting hyperopia were 98.31% and 97.14%; for detecting myopia were 78.50% and 88.64%; for detecting astigmatism were 90.91% and 80.37%; for detecting anisometropia were 93.10% and 85.25%; and for detection of strabismus was 77.55% and 88.18%.

Conclusion

The refractive values measured from Spot photoscreener showed a moderate agreement with the results from cycloplegic retinoscopy refraction, however there was an overall myopic shift of -0.49D. The performance in detecting individual amblyopia risk factors was satisfactory, but could be further improved by optimizing criteria based on ROC curves.

Comparison between refraction measured by Spot Vision Screening™ and subjective clinical refractometry

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of Spot Vision Screening™ as an autorefractor by comparing refraction measurements to subjective clinical refractometry results in children and adult patients.

METHODS

One-hundred and thirty-four eyes of 134 patients were submitted to refractometry by Spot and clinical refractometry under cycloplegia. Patients, students, physicians, staff and children of staff from the Hospital das Clínicas (School of Medicine, University of São Paulo) aged 7-50 years without signs of ocular disease were examined. Only right-eye refraction data were analyzed. The findings were converted in magnitude vectors for analysis.

RESULTS

The difference between Spot Vision Screening™ and subjective clinical refractometry expressed in spherical equivalents was +0.66±0.56 diopters (D), +0.16±0.27 D for the vector projected on the 90 axis and +0.02±0.15 D for the oblique vector.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the statistical significance of the difference between the two methods, we consider the difference non-relevant in a clinical setting, supporting the use of Spot Vision Screening™ as an ancillary method for estimating refraction.

Field Evaluation of Automated Vision Screening Instruments: Impact of Referral Criteria Choice on Screening Outcome

PURPOSE

Automated vision screeners can identify children with amblyopia risk factors. Two screening instruments having different referral criteria were evaluated in a community setting: SPOT (Pediavision, Lake Mary, FL) (sensitive manufacturer's referral criteria) and plusoptiX S08 (Plusoptix GmbH, Nuremberg, Germany) (specific modified Arthur referral criteria).

METHODS

All children were screened by SPOT, and referred children were then screened using plusoptiX. Referred children received a gold standard examination to determine whether amblyopia risk factors were present.

RESULTS

A total of 2,801 treatment-naïve children were screened using SPOT. Of these, 307 (11.0%) were referred by SPOT and subsequently screened by plusoptiX; 100 received a gold standard examination. Amblyopia risk factors were present in 43% (43 of 100) referred by SPOT compared to 72.7% (32 of 44) for plusoptiX. Eleven of 56 referred by SPOT had amblyopia risk factors that would have been missed by plusoptiX, including three with mild amblyopia.

CONCLUSIONS

PlusoptiX with modified Arthur referral criteria can be a highly specific screening device detecting amblyopia risk factors without missing children with moderate/severe amblyopia.

Accuracy of the Spot and Plusoptix photoscreeners for detection of astigmatism

PURPOSE

To evaluate the accuracy of the Spot (V2.0.16) and Plusoptix S12 (ROC4, V6.1.4.0) photoscreeners in detecting astigmatism meeting AAPOS referral criteria in students from a population with high prevalence of astigmatism.

METHODS

Students attending grades 3-8 on the Tohono O'odham reservation were examined. Screening was attempted with both the Spot and Plusoptix photoscreeners. Results were compared to cycloplegic refraction. Screening attempts providing no estimate of refractive error were considered fail/refer. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) for detection of refractive errors were determined using AAPOS referral criteria and receiver operating characteristic area under the curve (ROC AUC) analysis was conducted for measures of astigmatism. Agreement between screening and cycloplegic refraction measurements of astigmatism, spherical equivalent, and anisometropia were assessed using t tests and correlation analyses.

RESULTS

A total of 209 students were included. Of the total, 116 (55%) met examination-positive criteria based on cycloplegic refraction, with 105 of those (90%) meeting the criterion for astigmatism. Measurements success rates were 97% for Spot and 54% for Plusoptix. Comparing the Spot and the Plusoptix, sensitivity was 96% versus 100%, specificity was 87% versus 61%, PPV was 90% versus 76%, and NPV was 94% versus 100% for detection of refractive error. Both screeners overestimated astigmatism by 1/3 D to 2/3 D. AUC for astigmatism was 0.97 for Spot and 0.83 for Plusoptix.

CONCLUSIONS

In this highly astigmatic population, the Spot and the Plusoptix had similar sensitivity, but the Spot had better specificity and measurement success rates. Compared with results from study samples with lower rates of astigmatism, our results highlight the need to assess the ability of screening instruments to detect individual types of refractive errors.

The effectiveness of the Spot Vision Screener in detecting amblyopia risk factors

PURPOSE

To evaluate the updated Spot Vision Screener (PediaVision, Welch Allyn, Skaneateles Falls, NY) in detecting amblyopia risk factors using 2013 guidelines of American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus (AAPOS).

METHODS

In this prospective study, patients seen from June 2012 to November 2013 were tested with the Spot prior to examination by a pediatric ophthalmologist who was masked to test results. The following data were analyzed: age, subject testability, examination findings, and systemic and ocular pathology. Children were divided into three age groups to determine gold standard results according to the AAPOS guidelines.

RESULTS

A total of 444 children (average age, 72 months) were included. Compared to the ophthalmologist's examination, the Spot sensitivity was 87.7% and the specificity was 75.9% in detecting amblyopia risk factors. Sensitivity did not differ significantly between age groups, although the positive predictive value improved in the older age groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In our study cohort, the Spot provided good specificity and sensitivity in detecting amblyopia risk factors according 2013 AAPOS criteria, with minor improvements with updated versions.