Comparison of preschool vision screening methods in a population with a high prevalence of astigmatism

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

40 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose. To compare the effectiveness of four methods of screening 3- to 5-year-old children for astigmatism high enough to require spectacle correction. Methods. Lea Symbols Visual Acuity Screening (LSVAS), MTI Photoscreening (MTIPS), Nidek KM-500 Keratometry Screening (KERS), and Retinomax K-Plus Noncycloplegic Autorefraction Screening (NCARS) were attempted on 379 preschool children who are members of a Native American tribe having a high prevalence of astigmatism that is primarily corneal in origin. The need for spectacle correction was determined by cycloplegic refraction. Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curves were fit, confidence intervals were determined, and area under the curves was compared. Results. Astigmatism ≥ 1.00 D was present in the right eye of 47.5% and in the left eye of 48.0% of children. Spectacles were prescribed for children < 48 months of age who had cylinder ≥ 2.00 D and children ≥ 48 months who had cylinder ≥ 1.50 D, with the result that 33% of subjects required spectacles. Area under the ROC curve was 0.98 for NCARS, 0.92 for KERS, 0.78 for MTIPS, and 0.70 for LSVAS, and each of these values differed significantly from the other three (all P < 0.007). Testability was significantly higher for NCARS (99.5%) and KERS (99.7%) than for MTIPS (93.5%) and LSVAS (92.0%). Conclusions. In a population that included many children with astigmatism, objective, fully automated screening methods (NCARS and KERS) were superior to both visual acuity screening and photoscreening with subjective interpretation in identifying children who had astigmatism requiring spectacle correction.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)917-924
Number of pages8
JournalInvestigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science
Volume42
Issue number5
StatePublished - 2001

Fingerprint

Vision Screening
Astigmatism
Visual Acuity
Population
ROC Curve
Mydriatics
North American Indians
Preschool Children
Population Groups
Area Under Curve
Confidence Intervals

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Ophthalmology

Cite this

@article{046fc0167a32401ebedc97d9a1dddef3,
title = "Comparison of preschool vision screening methods in a population with a high prevalence of astigmatism",
abstract = "Purpose. To compare the effectiveness of four methods of screening 3- to 5-year-old children for astigmatism high enough to require spectacle correction. Methods. Lea Symbols Visual Acuity Screening (LSVAS), MTI Photoscreening (MTIPS), Nidek KM-500 Keratometry Screening (KERS), and Retinomax K-Plus Noncycloplegic Autorefraction Screening (NCARS) were attempted on 379 preschool children who are members of a Native American tribe having a high prevalence of astigmatism that is primarily corneal in origin. The need for spectacle correction was determined by cycloplegic refraction. Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curves were fit, confidence intervals were determined, and area under the curves was compared. Results. Astigmatism ≥ 1.00 D was present in the right eye of 47.5{\%} and in the left eye of 48.0{\%} of children. Spectacles were prescribed for children < 48 months of age who had cylinder ≥ 2.00 D and children ≥ 48 months who had cylinder ≥ 1.50 D, with the result that 33{\%} of subjects required spectacles. Area under the ROC curve was 0.98 for NCARS, 0.92 for KERS, 0.78 for MTIPS, and 0.70 for LSVAS, and each of these values differed significantly from the other three (all P < 0.007). Testability was significantly higher for NCARS (99.5{\%}) and KERS (99.7{\%}) than for MTIPS (93.5{\%}) and LSVAS (92.0{\%}). Conclusions. In a population that included many children with astigmatism, objective, fully automated screening methods (NCARS and KERS) were superior to both visual acuity screening and photoscreening with subjective interpretation in identifying children who had astigmatism requiring spectacle correction.",
author = "Miller, {Joseph M} and V. Dobson and Harvey, {Erin M} and Sherrill, {Duane L}",
year = "2001",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "42",
pages = "917--924",
journal = "Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science",
issn = "0146-0404",
publisher = "Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology Inc.",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison of preschool vision screening methods in a population with a high prevalence of astigmatism

AU - Miller, Joseph M

AU - Dobson, V.

AU - Harvey, Erin M

AU - Sherrill, Duane L

PY - 2001

Y1 - 2001

N2 - Purpose. To compare the effectiveness of four methods of screening 3- to 5-year-old children for astigmatism high enough to require spectacle correction. Methods. Lea Symbols Visual Acuity Screening (LSVAS), MTI Photoscreening (MTIPS), Nidek KM-500 Keratometry Screening (KERS), and Retinomax K-Plus Noncycloplegic Autorefraction Screening (NCARS) were attempted on 379 preschool children who are members of a Native American tribe having a high prevalence of astigmatism that is primarily corneal in origin. The need for spectacle correction was determined by cycloplegic refraction. Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curves were fit, confidence intervals were determined, and area under the curves was compared. Results. Astigmatism ≥ 1.00 D was present in the right eye of 47.5% and in the left eye of 48.0% of children. Spectacles were prescribed for children < 48 months of age who had cylinder ≥ 2.00 D and children ≥ 48 months who had cylinder ≥ 1.50 D, with the result that 33% of subjects required spectacles. Area under the ROC curve was 0.98 for NCARS, 0.92 for KERS, 0.78 for MTIPS, and 0.70 for LSVAS, and each of these values differed significantly from the other three (all P < 0.007). Testability was significantly higher for NCARS (99.5%) and KERS (99.7%) than for MTIPS (93.5%) and LSVAS (92.0%). Conclusions. In a population that included many children with astigmatism, objective, fully automated screening methods (NCARS and KERS) were superior to both visual acuity screening and photoscreening with subjective interpretation in identifying children who had astigmatism requiring spectacle correction.

AB - Purpose. To compare the effectiveness of four methods of screening 3- to 5-year-old children for astigmatism high enough to require spectacle correction. Methods. Lea Symbols Visual Acuity Screening (LSVAS), MTI Photoscreening (MTIPS), Nidek KM-500 Keratometry Screening (KERS), and Retinomax K-Plus Noncycloplegic Autorefraction Screening (NCARS) were attempted on 379 preschool children who are members of a Native American tribe having a high prevalence of astigmatism that is primarily corneal in origin. The need for spectacle correction was determined by cycloplegic refraction. Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curves were fit, confidence intervals were determined, and area under the curves was compared. Results. Astigmatism ≥ 1.00 D was present in the right eye of 47.5% and in the left eye of 48.0% of children. Spectacles were prescribed for children < 48 months of age who had cylinder ≥ 2.00 D and children ≥ 48 months who had cylinder ≥ 1.50 D, with the result that 33% of subjects required spectacles. Area under the ROC curve was 0.98 for NCARS, 0.92 for KERS, 0.78 for MTIPS, and 0.70 for LSVAS, and each of these values differed significantly from the other three (all P < 0.007). Testability was significantly higher for NCARS (99.5%) and KERS (99.7%) than for MTIPS (93.5%) and LSVAS (92.0%). Conclusions. In a population that included many children with astigmatism, objective, fully automated screening methods (NCARS and KERS) were superior to both visual acuity screening and photoscreening with subjective interpretation in identifying children who had astigmatism requiring spectacle correction.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0035071347&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0035071347&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

VL - 42

SP - 917

EP - 924

JO - Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science

JF - Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science

SN - 0146-0404

IS - 5

ER -