Diagnostic accuracy of the Parr vision test, single crowded Lea symbols and Spot vision screener for vision screening of preschool children aged 4-5 years in Aotearoa/New Zealand

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.

Refractive errors, amblyopia risk factors and vision screening in children aged 7-10 years in Aotearoa New Zealand

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Vision screening is important for detecting undiagnosed vision conditions that are common in school-aged children. However, current vision screening protocols are poor at detecting vision conditions that are most common in the Aotearoa New Zealand paediatric population.

BACKGROUND

Uncorrected refractive error and amblyopia are the most common causes of visual impairment in children. The most appropriate vision screening method depends on the refractive error profile of the population. This study aimed to: estimate the prevalence of refractive errors and amblyopia risk factors among children living in Aotearoa New Zealand; describe previous participation in preschool vision screening and determine the diagnostic accuracy of potential screening methods.

METHODS

Children aged 7-10 years received comprehensive eye examinations, including cycloplegic refraction, in their school. Eye examination results were assessed for refractive error and amblyopia risk factors. The sensitivity and specificity of individual vision tests for detecting any vision conditions was calculated to assess the most effective tests for vision screening.

RESULTS

Eye examinations were completed for 237 children and cycloplegic refraction data was available for 220 of these children. Significant refractive error (need for glasses) was detected in 23.6% of children (7.7% myopia, 7.7% hyperopia, 15.0% astigmatism). Amblyopia risk factors were detected in 9.1% of children. Preschool vision screening had been completed by 78.5% of children. Distance visual acuity screening alone had a sensitivity of 39% for detecting vision conditions, with addition of the Spot Vision Screener improving sensitivity to 65%.

CONCLUSION

Astigmatism is the most frequent refractive error among children aged 7-10 years living in Aotearoa New Zealand. Distance visual acuity screening alone is ineffective in detecting refractive error in children in Aotearoa New Zealand. Further research investigating refractive errors across the paediatric population in Aotearoa New Zealand is required to determine the optimal timing and appropriate protocols for school-aged vision screening.

Combination of 2 test methods, single-picture optotype visual acuity chart and spot™ vision screener, in the eye health screening program for 3-year-old children in Tokyo: A retrospective, observational study

To evaluate the usefulness of the Tokyo Metropolitan Government's Eye Health Screening Program for 3-year-old children, which combines the Single-Picture Optotype Visual Acuity Chart (SPVAC) and Spot™ Vision Screener (SVS) tests. This was a retrospective, observational, matched study. Patients who underwent the eye health screening program and had abnormalities were classified into 3 groups according to the outcomes of the SPVAC (SPVAC-passed, SPVAC-P; SPVAC-failed, SPVAC-F) and SVS (SVS-passed, SVS-P; SVS-failed, SVS-F) tests as follows: SPVAC-P/SVS-F, SPVAC-F/SVS-P, and SPVAC-F/SVS-F. We evaluated the age at examination, SPVAC and SVS test success rates, and SVS refractive power. Additionally, the rates of refractive error, amblyopia, and strabismus were compared among the 3 groups. The SPVAC-P/SVS-F, SPVAC-F/SVS-P, and SPVAC-F/SVS-F groups comprised 158, 28, and 74 eyes, respectively. The mean age was 37.4 months. The success rates of the SPVAC and SVS tests were 69.8% and 96.2%, respectively. The mean SVS hyperopia value in the SPVAC-F/SVS-F group (2.71 ± 1.50 D) was significantly higher than that of the SPVAC-P/SVS-F group. The mean SVS astigmatism and myopia values were -2.21 diopter (D) ± 1.09 D and -3.40 ± 1.82 D, respectively; they did not differ significantly from that of the SPVAC-P/SVS-F group. Significant differences were observed in the refractive error, amblyopia, and strabismus rates among the 3 groups. Regarding disease determination, no significant difference was observed among participants who passed and failed the SPVAC test, regardless of the outcome of the other test. However, a significant difference was observed between those passing and failing the SVS tests. The SPVAC method used to screen 3-year-old children should be modified to commence at 42 months of age or be replaced with a single Landolt C test. The SVS test is useful for screening younger patients. Furthermore, the SVS test showed that the degree of hyperopia was higher in patients who did not pass the SPVAC test.