Vision screening for children: Current trends, technology, and legislative issues

Current Opinion in Ophthalmology

Volumn 15, Issue 5, 2004, Pages 454-459

  Kerr, Natalie C ^a   Arnold, Robert W ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE HEALTH SCIENCE CENTER   (United States)

^b Ophthalmic Associates   (United States)

Author keywords

Amblyopia; Autorefractors; Photorefractors; Photoscreening; Vision screening

Indexed keywords

AMBLYOPIA; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; EVOKED VISUAL RESPONSE; HIGH RISK POPULATION; HUMAN; POPULATION RESEARCH; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRESCHOOL CHILD; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REFRACTION ERROR; REIMBURSEMENT; RELIABILITY; REVIEW; SCREENING TEST; TECHNOLOGY; VERBAL COMMUNICATION; VISION;

CHILD; CHILD, PRESCHOOL; HUMANS; INFANT; UNITED STATES; VISION SCREENING;

EID: 4644337724     PISSN: 10408738     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/01.icu.0000136112.48664.62     Document Type: Review

References (49)

1. Available at: http://www.retinoblastoma.com
2. Bowyer NK, Kleinstein RN: Healthy people 2010: vision objectives for the nation. Optometry 2000, 71:569-578.
3. Link between vision and learning is significant. Available at: http://www.visionsite.org. Vision Council of America.
4. Helveston EM, Weber JC, Miller K, et al.: Visual function and academic performance. Am J Ophthalmol 1985, 99:346-355.
5. Evans BJ, Drasdo N, Richards IL: Investigation of accommodative and binocular function in dyslexia. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 1994, 14:5-19.
6. Donahue SP, Arnold RW, Ruben JB, AAPOS Vision Screening Committee: Preschool vision screening: what should we be detecting and how should we report it? Uniform guidelines for reporting results of preschool vision screening studies. J AAPOS 2003, 7:314-316. Consensus opinion by the American Association of Pediatric Ophthalmology about significant amblyogenic factors based on available evidence in peer-reviewed literature. These guidelines should help improve the ability to compare different screening techniques for efficacy.
7. Snowdon SK, Stewart-Brown SL: Preschool vision screening. Health Technol Assess 1997, 1:i-iv, 1-83.
8. Clarke MP, Wright CM, Hrisos S, et al.: Randomised controlled trial of treatment of unilateral visual impairment detected at preschool vision screening. BMJ 2003, 327:1251. A masked prospective study using orthoptist screening of children from a district in England, this study has prompted several letters to the editor at BMJ. This article reports that children with 20/30 vision in the worst eye do not improve significantly with treatment, while confirming that children with vision of less than 20/60 in the worst eye showed a significant response to treatment when identified at preschool vision screening.
9. Hard AL, Sjodell L, Borres MP, et al.: Preschool vision screening in a Swedish city region: results after alteration of criteria for referral to eye clinics. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 2002, 80:608-611.
10. Committee on Practice and Ambulatory Medicine Section on Ophthalmology, American Association of Certified Orthoptists, American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus, American Academy of Ophthalmology: Eye examination in infants, children, and young adults by pediatricians: organizational principles to guide and define the child health care system and/or improve the health of all children. Ophthalmology 2003, 110:860-865. The "gold standard" guide for primary care physicians screening children for vision and visual system problems, these recommendations do not currently include photoscreening or autorefraction.
11. Friedman LS, Kaufman LM: Guidelines for pediatrician referrals to the ophthalmologist. Pediatr Clin North Am 2003, 50:41-53.
12. Rose K, Younan C, Morgan I, Mitchell P: Prevalence of undetected ocular conditions in a pilot sample of school children. Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2003, 31:237-240.
13. American Academy of Pediatrics: Use of photoscreening for children's vision screening. Pediatrics 2002, 109:524-525.
14. Atkinson J, Anker S, Nardini M, et al.: Infant vision screening predicts failures on motor and cognitive tests up to school age. Strabismus 2002, 10:187-198.
15. Kuo A, Sinatra RB, Donahue SP: Distribution of refractive error in healthy infants. J AAPOS 2003, 7:174-177. This literature should serve as a guideline for determining the relative rate of various amblyogenic factors in a "normal" infant population-very useful information for designing cost-effective studies in the future.
16. Kemper AR, Clark SJ, Freed GL: Services provided for preschool-aged children with suspected amblyopia. J Pediatr Ophthalmol Strabismus 2003, 49:279-282.
17. Donahue SP: How often are spectacles prescribed to 'normal' preschool children? Impact of mandatory eye exam legislation. J AAPOS 2004, 8:80.
18. Bursting E, Rouse MW, Deland PN, et al.: Association of symptoms and convergence and accommodative insufficiency in school-age children. Optometry 2003, 74:25-34. This study used a novel survey to determine the at-risk population for Cl and Al. The authors conclude that their findings support regular comprehensive eye examinations for school-aged children, but their results do not necessarily support this conclusion.
19. Wilson J, Junger G: Principles and Practice of Screening for Disease. Geneva: World Health Organization, 1968. Public Health paper no. 34.
20. Schmidt P, Maguire M, Dobson V, et al.: Comparison of preschool vision screening tests as administered by licensed eye care professionals in the Vision In Preschoolers Study. Ophthalmology 2004, 111:637-650. Comparison of preschool vision screening tests as administered by licensed eye care professionals, the VIP Study, a National Institutes of Health-funded multicenter study group, has just published the results of the first true comparison, on the same subjects, of a variety of different preschool vision screening tests. This is the most authoritative study comparing different screening methods currently available.
21. Arnold R, Gionet E, Jastrzebski A, et al.: The Alaska Blind Child Discovery project: rationale, methods and results of 4000 screenings. Alaska Med 2000, 42:58-72.
22. Donahue SP, Johnson TM: Age-based refinement of referral criteria for photoscreening. Ophthalmology 2001, 108:2309-2315.
23. Kennedy R, Thomas D: Evaluation of the iScreen digital screening system for amblyogenic factors. Can J Ophthalmol 2000, 35:258-262.
24. Cyert L, Schmidt P, Maguire M, et al.: Threshold visual acuity testing of preschool children using the crowded HOTV and Lea Symbols acuity tests. J AAPOS 2003, 7:396-399.
25. Wagner R, Donahue SP, Arnold RW, Granet D: Pediatric photoscreening: eye to eye. J Pediatr Ophthalmol Strabismus, in press.
26. Joish VN, Malone DC, Miller JM: A cost-benefit analysis of vision screening methods for preschoolers and school-age children. J AAPOS 2003, 7:283-290. Excellent study utilizing decision-analytical model applied to current published reports of vision screening in preschoolers to determine that photoscreening preschoolers was the most cost-effective method of screening for amblyopia-more so than visual acuity screening of 7- and 8-year-olds.
27. Committee on Practice and Ambulatory Medicine and Section on Ophthalmology, American Academy of Pediatrics: Use of photoscreening for children's vision screening. Pediatrics 2002, 109:524-525.
28. Salcido AA, Johnson T, Bradley J, Donahue SP: Predictive value of photoscreening and traditional screening of preschool children. Paper presented at: AAPOS Annual Meeting; 2003; Waikoloa, Hawaii.
29. Ehrlich MI, Reinecke RD, Simons K: Preschool vision screening for amblyopia and strabismus: programs, methods, guidelines. Surv Ophthalmol 1983, 28:145-163.
30. Castanes MS: Major review: The underutilization of vision screening (for amblyopia, optical anomalies and strabismus) among preschool age children. Binocul Vis Strabismus Q 2003, 18:217-232.
31. Strawhacker MT, Gustafson JK, Kinne MJ, Little D: Vision screening practices in central Iowa: a follow-up evaluation. J Sch Nurs 2003, 19:111-118.
32. Kemper AR, Fant KE, Badgett JT: Preschool vision screening in primary care after a legislative mandate for diagnostic eye examinations. South Med J 2003, 96:859-862.
33. Wasserman RC, Croft CA, Brotherton SE: Preschool vision screening in pediatric practice: a study from the Pediatric Research in Office Settings (PROS) Network. Pediatrics 1992, 89:834-838.
34. Wall TC, Marsh-Tootle W, Evans HH, et al.: Compliance with vision-screening guidelines among a national sample of pediatricians. Ambul Pediatr 2002, 2:449-455.
35. Campbell LR, Charney E: Factors associated with delay in diagnosis of childhood amblyopia. Pediatrics 1991, 87:178-185.
36. Hered RW, Rothstein M: Preschool vision screening frequency after an office-based training session for primary care staff. Pediatrics 2003, 112:17-21. This is a sobering article for ophthalmologists trying to support screening activities in primary care offices.
37. Schimitzek T, Schworm HD: Wave-front analysis as screening technique for amblyogenic ametropia with and without cycloplegia. Strabismus 2003, 11:133-143.
38. Simon JW, Siegfried JB, Mills MD, et al.: Evaluation of a new, "Child-Friendly" VEP system for the detection of amblyopia in infants and young children. J AAPOS 2004, 8:85.
39. Miller JM, Dobson V, Harvey EM, Sherrill DL: Cost-efficient vision screening for astigmatism in Native American preschool children. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2003, 44:3756-3763. This article is a must-read for those setting up or evaluating an existing screening program. This study utilized good basic information about their population, as well as assumptions about costs that could be applied to or modified for other studies.
40. Barry JC, Konig HH: Test characteristics of orthoptic screening examination in 3 year old kindergarten children [published erratum in Br J Ophthalmol 2003, 87:1196]. Br J Ophthalmol 2003, 87:909-916.
41. Barry JC, Konig HH: Test characteristics of orthoptic screening examination in 3 year old kindergarten children [published erratum in Br J Ophthalmol 2003, 87:1196]. Br J Ophthalmol 2003, 87:909-916.
42. Williams C, Northstone K, Harrad RA: Amblyopia treatment outcomes after screening before or at age 3 years: follow up from randomised trial. BMJ 2002, 324:1549.
43. Williams C, Northstone K, Harrad RA, et al.: Amblyopia treatment outcomes after preschool screening v school entry screening: observational data from a prospective cohort study. Br J Ophthalmol 2003, 87:988-993. An important continuation of the ALSPAC Group looking at a single screening examination and its impact on treatment outcomes in preschool children. Conclusions must be carefully examined, as certain assumptions based on "intent to screen" limited the statistical ability of this study to report a positive outcome for screening.
44. Gandjour A, Schlichtherle S, Neugebauer A, et al.: A cost-effectiveness model of screening strategies for amblyopia and risk factors and its application in a German setting. Optom Vis Sci 2003, 80:259-269.
45. Scheiman M, Amos C, Ciner E, et al.: Pediatric Eye and Vision Examination: Reference Guide for Clinicians. St. Louis, MO: American Optometric Association, 1994:45. Optometric Clinical Practice Guideline.
46. Adler R, Lappe M, Murphree AL: Pupil dilation at the first well baby examination for documenting choroidal light reflex. J Pediatr 1991, 118:249-252.
47. Zaba JN, Johnson RA, Reynolds WT: Vision examinations for all children entering public school: the new Kentucky law. Optometry 2003, 74:149-158.
48. Kvarnstrom G, Jakobsson P, Lennerstrand G: Screening for visual and ocular disorders in children: evaluation of the system in Sweden. Acta Paediatr 1998, 87:1173-1179.
49. Eibschitz-Tsimhoni M, Friedman T, Naor J, et al.: Early screening for amblyogenic risk factors lowers the prevalence and severity of amblyopia. J AAPOS 2000, 4:194-199.