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

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.

Current Challenges Supporting School-Aged Children with Vision Problems: A Rapid Review

Many children have undetected vision problems or insufficient visual information processing that may be a factor in lower academic outcomes. The aim of this paper is to contribute to a better understanding of the importance of vision screening for school-aged children, and to investigate the possibilities of how eye-tracking (ET) technologies can support this. While there are indications that these technologies can support vision screening, a broad understanding of how to apply them and by whom, and if it is possible to utilize them at schools, is lacking. We review interdisciplinary research on performing vision investigations, and discuss current challenges for technology support. The focus is on exploring the possibilities of ET technologies to better support screening and handling of vision disorders, especially by non-vision experts. The data orginate from a literature survey of peer-reviewed journals and conference articles complemented by secondary sources, following a rapid review methodology. We highlight current trends in supportive technologies for vision screening, and identify the involved stakeholders and the research studies that discuss how to develop more supportive ET technologies for vision screening and training by non-experts.

Hearing and vision screening for preschool children using mobile technology, South Africa

Objective

To implement and evaluate a community-based hearing and vision screening programme for preschool children in the Western Cape, South Africa, supported by mobile health technology (mHealth) and delivered by community health workers (CHWs).

Methods

We trained four CHWs to provide dual sensory screening in preschool centres of Khayelitsha and Mitchells Plain during September 2017–December 2018. CHWs screened children aged 4–7 years using mHealth software applications on smartphones. We used logistic regression analysis to evaluate the association between screening results and age, sex and test duration, and, for hearing, excessive background noise levels.

Results

CHWs screened 94.4% (8023/10 362) of eligible children at 271 centres at a cost of 5.63 United States dollars per child. The number of children who failed an initial hearing and visual test was 435 (5.4%) and 170 (2.1%), respectively. Hearing test failure was associated with longer test times (odds ratio, OR: 1.022; 95% confidence interval, CI: 1.021–1.024) and excessive background noise levels at 1 kilohertz (kHz) (e.g. OR for left ear: 1.688; 95% CI: 1.198–2.377). Visual screening failure was associated with longer test duration (OR: 1.003; 95% CI: 1.002–1.005) and younger age (OR: 0.629; 95% CI: 0.520–0.761). Of the total screened, 111 (1.4%) children were diagnosed with a hearing and/or visual impairment.

Conclusion

mHealth-supported CHW-delivered hearing and vision screening in preschool centres provided a low-cost, acceptable and accessible service, contributing to lower referral numbers to resource-constrained public health institutions.