Home About us Contact
|
Home About us Contact | ||
|
|
||
Vision Screening (vision + screening)
Selected AbstractsVision screening of older peopleOPHTHALMIC AND PHYSIOLOGICAL OPTICS, Issue 6 2007Zahra Jessa Abstract A recent systematic review found that between 20% and 50% of older people in the UK have undetected reduced vision and in most cases this is caused by refractive error or cataracts, and is correctable. Two approaches to improve the detection of these problems are to better publicise optometric services and to carry out community-based vision screening of older people. Screening programmes should pass the Wilson criteria and a consideration of these highlights three inter-related questions: ,Is vision screening effective at detecting correctable low vision in older people?'; ,Which tests should be included?' and ,Which venues are most appropriate?' We carried out a systematic review to investigate these questions. For the first question, only one study was found which met our selection criteria. The ,gold standard' eye examination in this study lacked several important components, and the vision screening method that was used was not found to be very effective. The review revealed other studies, which, although not meeting our selection criteria, included relevant information. The screening studies highlight the lack of agreement on the content of a gold standard eye examination and of the test(s) that should be used to screen vision. Visual function in older people is not adequately described by high contrast visual acuity (VA), nor by self-reports of visual difficulties. Other tests that may be relevant include visual field testing, low contrast VA, contrast sensitivity and stereo-acuity. The pinhole test has often been used in attempts to detect uncorrected refractive errors, but results from this test can be problematic and possible reasons for this are discussed. Appropriate venues for vision screening are contingent upon the format of the vision screening programme. There is still uncertainty over the battery of vision tests that are most appropriate. This, and optimum venues for screening, require further research before it can be fully determined whether vision screening of older people meets the Wilson criteria. If a vision screening programme using a battery of vision tests, perhaps computerised, can be established, then this should be tested to determine the sensitivity and specificity for detecting the target conditions. Ultimately, longitudinal studies are necessary to determine whether such a screening programme will lead to improved visual performance and quality of life in older people. [source] Detection of Childhood Visual Impairment in At-Risk GroupsJOURNAL OF POLICY AND PRACTICE IN INTELLECTUAL DISABILITIES, Issue 3 2007Heleen Evenhuis Abstract, Children with intellectual disabilities have an increased risk of visual impairment, caused by both ocular and cerebral abnormalities, but this risk has not been quantified. The same applies to preterm children and children with cerebral palsy with a normal intelligence. Many cases probably go unidentified, because participation of these children in preschool vision screening programs is not guaranteed, or because no screening program is available. Although there may be a case for specific screening, there is insufficient scientific evidence supporting such a claim. A "safety net" construction for vision screening is proposed by a Dutch expert working party, based on scientific information and joint professional expertise, to improve identification of both ocular and cerebral visual impairment in at-risk groups. Costs and gains of the model should be scientifically evaluated in a test region. [source] Vision screening of older peopleOPHTHALMIC AND PHYSIOLOGICAL OPTICS, Issue 6 2007Zahra Jessa Abstract A recent systematic review found that between 20% and 50% of older people in the UK have undetected reduced vision and in most cases this is caused by refractive error or cataracts, and is correctable. Two approaches to improve the detection of these problems are to better publicise optometric services and to carry out community-based vision screening of older people. Screening programmes should pass the Wilson criteria and a consideration of these highlights three inter-related questions: ,Is vision screening effective at detecting correctable low vision in older people?'; ,Which tests should be included?' and ,Which venues are most appropriate?' We carried out a systematic review to investigate these questions. For the first question, only one study was found which met our selection criteria. The ,gold standard' eye examination in this study lacked several important components, and the vision screening method that was used was not found to be very effective. The review revealed other studies, which, although not meeting our selection criteria, included relevant information. The screening studies highlight the lack of agreement on the content of a gold standard eye examination and of the test(s) that should be used to screen vision. Visual function in older people is not adequately described by high contrast visual acuity (VA), nor by self-reports of visual difficulties. Other tests that may be relevant include visual field testing, low contrast VA, contrast sensitivity and stereo-acuity. The pinhole test has often been used in attempts to detect uncorrected refractive errors, but results from this test can be problematic and possible reasons for this are discussed. Appropriate venues for vision screening are contingent upon the format of the vision screening programme. There is still uncertainty over the battery of vision tests that are most appropriate. This, and optimum venues for screening, require further research before it can be fully determined whether vision screening of older people meets the Wilson criteria. If a vision screening programme using a battery of vision tests, perhaps computerised, can be established, then this should be tested to determine the sensitivity and specificity for detecting the target conditions. Ultimately, longitudinal studies are necessary to determine whether such a screening programme will lead to improved visual performance and quality of life in older people. [source] Referral rates for a functional vision screening among a large cosmopolitan sample of Australian childrenOPHTHALMIC AND PHYSIOLOGICAL OPTICS, Issue 1 2002Barbara Junghans The aim of this study was to investigate the incidence of functional vision problems in a large unselected cosmopolitan population of primary school-age children and to investigate whether constant clinical criteria for functional vision problems would be implemented by the practitioners involved in the screening. Refractive errors, near point of convergence, stereopsis, strabismus, heterophoria and accommodative facility were assessed for 2697 children (3,12 years) of varying racial backgrounds living in Australia. The spherical component of the refractive error ranged from ,7.75 to +9.50 D (mean +0.54 D, ±0.79) with a distribution skewed towards hypermetropia; astigmatism ranged from 0 to 4.25 D (mean ,0.16 D, ±0.35). There was a trend towards less hypermetropia and slightly more astigmatism with age. Mean near point of convergence was 5.4 ± 2.9 cm, heterophoria at far and near was 0.12 ± 1.58, exophoria and 1.05 ± 2.53, exophoria, respectively, 0.55% of children exhibited vertical phoria at near >0.5,, accommodative facility ranged from 0 to 24 cycles per minute (cpm) (mean 11.2 cpm, ±3.7), stereopsis varied from 20 to 800 s (,,) of arc with 50% of children having 40,, or better. The prevalence of strabismus was particularly low (0.3%). Twenty percent of the children were referred for further assessment based on criteria of one or more of: stereopsis >70,,, accommodative facility <8 cpm, near point of convergence (NPC) >9 cm, near exophoria >10, or near esophoria >5,, shift in eso or exophoria , 4, between distance and near, astigmatism , 1 D, myopia more than ,0.75 D, or hyperopia >+1.50 D. Post-hoc analysis of the record cards seeking the reason for further assessment indicates that referrals appear to have been based upon clinical intuition rather than on a set number of borderline or unsatisfactory results. [source] Paediatric community vision screening with combined optometric and orthoptic care: a 64-month reviewOPHTHALMIC AND PHYSIOLOGICAL OPTICS, Issue 1 2002Lisa A. Donaldson We report a new model of community-based secondary vision screening and demonstrate that a high proportion of children can be effectively managed in such a clinic without referral to the hospital eye service (HES). We performed a 64-month retrospective study of a secondary vision screening clinic providing the combined skills of an optometrist and orthoptist in a community setting. Particular attention was given to the diagnosis and management of children not referred to the HES. During this period, 1755 children were sent appointments and 74% (1300) attended the clinic. The community orthoptist and school nurses referred 53% of the patients and health visitors, general practitioners and community medical officers made 32% of the clinic referrals. Spectacles were prescribed for 41% of the children and 8% were prescribed patching. Sixteen per cent of the children were referred on to the HES. This model of care using the combined expertise of the orthoptist and optometrist is able to diagnose and manage the majority of children who have failed primary vision screening and avoids unnecessary referrals to the HES. [source] The problem of school vision screening: is the Orinda Study dead?CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL OPTOMETRY, Issue 3 2010Barry L Cole PhD MAppSc BSc LOSc FAAO No abstract is available for this article. [source] | ||||||||||