Search

Background: As instrument-based pediatric vision screening technology has evolved, the American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus (AAPOS) has developed uniform guidelines (2003, updated 2013) to inform the development of devices that can detect specified target levels of amblyopia risk factors (ARFs) and visually significant refractive error. Clinical experience with the established guidelines has revealed an apparent high level of over-referral for non-amblyopic, symmetric astigmatism, prompting the current revision., Methods: The revised guidelines reflect the expert consensus of the AAPOS Vision Screening and Research Committees., Results: For studies of automated screening devices, AAPOS in 2021 recommends that the gold-standard confirmatory comprehensive examination failure levels include anisometropia >1.25 D and hyperopia >4.0 D. Astigmatism >3.0 D in any meridian and myopia < -3 D should be detected in children <48 months, whereas astigmatism >1.75 D and myopia < -2 D should be detected after 48 months. Any media opacity >1 mm and manifest strabismus of >8 Δ should also be identified. Along with performance in detecting ARFs and refractive error, validation studies should also report screening instrument performance with regard to presence or absence of amblyopia. Instrument receiver operating characteristic curves and Bland-Altman analysis are suggested to improve comparability of validation studies., Conclusions: Examination failure criteria have been simplified and the threshold for symmetric astigmatism raised compared to the 2013 guidelines, whereas the threshold for amblyogenic anisometropia has been decreased. After age 4 years, lower magnitudes of symmetric astigmatism and myopia are also targeted despite a low risk of amblyopia, because they can influence school performance and may warrant consideration of myopia prevention therapy., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To discuss the evolution of instrument-based screening to detect amblyopia and its risk factors, and to summarize the importance of preschool vision screening., Design: Expert commentary., Methods: Author experiences were supplemented by a review and interpretation of pertinent medical literature., Results: Amblyopia remains a public health problem, as it is a common cause of monocular visual impairment. As a disease, amblyopia detection is best obtained by appropriate vision screening rather than by yearly mandated comprehensive eye examinations for all children; the US Preventative Services Task Force (USPSTF) recently reaffirmed their recommendations for vision screening in preschool children. Vision screening devices have evolved over the past 4 decades ranging from photoscreeners that use instantaneously developing film, to autorefractors that detect amblyopia risk factors, to nerve fiber layer scanners that detect the microtropia that nearly always accompanies amblyopia. When it is detected early, effective treatment for amblyopia can be initiated., Conclusions: Amblyopia is a reversible cause of vision loss in children. Vision screening devices and screening programs have been extensively studied-experts and literature agree: vision screening devices and programs are cost-effective, are efficient, and are effective methods for amblyopia detection. The authors support the regular use of instrument-based vision screening in the medical home for all children until they reach a developmental stage where they can participate reliably in optotype-based vision screening., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Photoscreening instruments have been widely validated in pediatric ophthalmology clinics and field studies; however, validation by general pediatricians is lacking. We performed the first prospective, multisite evaluation of a commercially available photoscreener in the medical home., Methods: Eleven practices in Middle Tennessee recruited over 3,100 children between 12 months and 5 years to be screened at well-child examinations. Participants were those who received a "refer" result; controls received a "pass." Referred children received a comprehensive eye examination with cycloplegic retinoscopy. A subset of control children underwent eye examinations in an attempt to determine sensitivity and specificity., Results: The overall referral rate was 10%. Amblyopia risk factors (ARFs) were confirmed in 47% of referred children, with positive predictive values (PPVs) of 77.8% for suspected hyperopia, 60% for myopia, 50% for anisometropia, and 44.8% for astigmatism by the 2013 guidelines of the American Association of Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus Vision Screening Committee. Using the 2003 guidelines, the overall PPV was 60.3%; PPVs were determined for suspected hyperopia (77.8%), myopia (60%), anisometropia (67.6%), and astigmatism (61.2%). Of referred children who received follow-up, 18 (13.2%) had amblyopia. PPVs for children ≤36 months (n = 79) did not differ from those 37-72 months (n = 57). No child who passed screening and had a follow-up examination had any ARFs., Conclusions: Our results replicate those of previously published field studies and support recent United States Preventive Services Task Force and American Academy of Pediatrics position statements. They provide prospective evidence that photoscreening is an effective tool for children aged 12-72 months., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Vision screening is crucial for the detection of visual and systemic disorders. It should begin in the newborn nursery and continue throughout childhood. This clinical report provides details regarding methods for pediatricians to use for screening., (Copyright © 2016 by the American Academy of Pediatrics.)

Purpose: Automated vision screeners can identify children with amblyopia risk factors. Two screening instruments having different referral criteria were evaluated in a community setting: SPOT (Pediavision, Lake Mary, FL) (sensitive manufacturer's referral criteria) and plusoptiX S08 (Plusoptix GmbH, Nuremberg, Germany) (specific modified Arthur referral criteria)., Methods: All children were screened by SPOT, and referred children were then screened using plusoptiX. Referred children received a gold standard examination to determine whether amblyopia risk factors were present., Results: A total of 2,801 treatment-naïve children were screened using SPOT. Of these, 307 (11.0%) were referred by SPOT and subsequently screened by plusoptiX; 100 received a gold standard examination. Amblyopia risk factors were present in 43% (43 of 100) referred by SPOT compared to 72.7% (32 of 44) for plusoptiX. Eleven of 56 referred by SPOT had amblyopia risk factors that would have been missed by plusoptiX, including three with mild amblyopia., Conclusions: PlusoptiX with modified Arthur referral criteria can be a highly specific screening device detecting amblyopia risk factors without missing children with moderate/severe amblyopia., (Copyright 2015, SLACK Incorporated.)

Purpose: To validate the Spot Vision Screener, a handheld digital screening device that evaluates children for amblyopia risk factors as defined by 2013 criteria of the American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus (AAPOS), in the setting of a controlled pediatric ophthalmology clinic., Methods: During a 3-month period, children 2-9 years of age were screened using Spot in a pediatric ophthalmology clinic before receiving a gold standard eye examination. Gold standard examinations were evaluated using the 2013 AAPOS Vision Screening Committee guidelines and compared with results from Spot, which were evaluated using two different manufacturer referral criteria: v1.0.3 and v1.1.51. The specificity and sensitivity for each set of referral criteria to detect both amblyopia risk factors and amblyopia were calculated., Results: A total of 233 children were included. Of these, 155 were successfully screened and analyzed according to two different referral criteria. Spot screeing revealed ambyopia risk factors in 109 patients; examination confirmed amblyopia in 64. Using the original manufacturer's criteria (v1.0.3), Spot was 89% sensitive and 71% specific in detecting amblyopia risk factors. The updated referral criteria (v1.1.51) were applied to the same 155 patients, and specificity improved to 88% (P < 0.02); sensitivity remained minimally affected, at 85% (P < 0.05). Spot-v1.0.3 was 92% sensitive and 41% specific in detecting amblyopia, whereas Spot-v1.1.51 was 89% sensitive and 53% specific for detecting amblyopia., Conclusions: The Spot-v1.0.3 had high sensitivity but overreferred for suspected myopia and strabismus; Spot-v1.1.51 maintained high sensitivity and improved specificity. The original referral criteria has a high sensitivity to detect amblyopia risk factors but low specificty; v1.1.51 criteria increases specificity with minimal impact on sensitivity., (Copyright © 2014 American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Two cases of otherwise healthy children with no known family history of retinoblastoma who were diagnosed as having retinoblastoma after failing a visual-evoked potential test during a well-child visit are reported. This early detection allowed for eye-sparing treatment., (Copyright 2013, SLACK Incorporated.)

In 2003 the American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus Vision Screening Committee proposed criteria for automated preschool vision screening. Recent literature from epidemiologic and natural history studies, randomized controlled trials of amblyopia treatment, and field studies of screening technologies have been reviewed for the purpose of updating these criteria. The prevalence of amblyopia risk factors (ARF) is greater than previously suspected; many young children with low-magnitude ARFs do not develop amblyopia, and those who do often respond to spectacles alone. High-magnitude ARFs increase the likelihood of amblyopia. Although depth increases with age, amblyopia remains treatable until 60 months, with decline in treatment effectiveness after age 5. US Preventive Services Task Force Preventative Services Task Force guidelines allow photoscreening for children older than 36 months of age. Some technologies directly detect amblyopia rather than ARFs. Age-based criteria for ARF detection using photoscreening is prudent: referral criteria for such instruments should produce high specificity for ARF detection in young children and high sensitivity to detect amblyopia in older children. Refractive screening for ARFs for children aged 12-30 months should detect astigmatism >2.0 D, hyperopia >4.5 D, and anisometropia >2.5 D; for children aged 31-48 months, astigmatism >2.0 D, hyperopia > 4.0 D, and anisometropia >2.0 D. For children >49 months of age original criteria should be used: astigmatism >1.5 D, anisometropia>1.5 D, and hyperopia >3.5 D. Visually significant media opacities and manifest (not intermittent) strabismus should be detected at all ages. Instruments that detect amblyopia should report results using amblyopia presence as the gold standard. These new American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus Vision Screening Committee guidelines will improve reporting of results and comparison of technologies., (Copyright © 2013 American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To determine the impact of using several different proposed sets of referral criteria on the specificity and sensitivity of the plusoptiX S08 photoscreener for detecting amblyopia risk factors., Methods: During a 2-month period, 144 children ages 9 months to 14 years were screened at the Tennessee Lions Eye Center before receiving a comprehensive eye examination and cycloplegic refraction. Three previously published sets of referral criteria were used for screening, including the manufacturer's criteria and the criteria proposed by Arthur and colleagues, which are nearly identical to the gold standard examination failure thresholds proposed by the Vision Screening Committee of the American Association of Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus (AAPOS). Modifications of these criteria also were evaluated. The screening results obtained by the plusoptiX S08 were compared with the results from the gold standard pediatric ophthalmologic examination, and the respective sensitivities and specificities of each set of referral criteria in detecting amblyopia risk factors identified by the AAPOS Vision Screening Committee were calculated., Results: The manufacturer's criteria yielded high sensitivity (100%) but very low specificity (37%). The Arthur criteria, which used the values for the AAPOS-defined amblyopia risk factors as referral criteria, maintained sensitivity (89%) and greatly improved specificity (76%). Two modifications of the Arthur criteria further increased specificity with minimal loss of sensitivity., Conclusions: The manufacturer's criteria have excellent sensitivity but low specificity, warranting modification; other criteria increase specificity with minimal effect on sensitivity., (Copyright © 2011 American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Early childhood hypermetropia is an important risk factor for the development of amblyopia and esotropia. Understanding the natural history of these complications aids in management decisions., Methods: A retrospective observational review was undertaken of 149 patients referred from a preschool photoscreening program who were determined to have hypermetropia of >or=+3.75 D spherical equivalent on criterion standard examination and were treated/followed by one group of academic pediatric ophthalmologists. The prevalence and incidence of accommodative esotropia and amblyopia were determined., Results: At presentation 19% of hypermetropic children had amblyopia, 32% had esotropia, and 13% had both. Follow-up data of 108 patients during a mean of 40 months showed that 20 (24%) of 83 initially nonamblyopic patients developed amblyopia and that 22 (33%) of 67 initially nonstrabismic patients developed accommodative esotropia. Of patients initially managed with observation, 38% (6 of 16) developed amblyopia, and 31% (5 of 16) developed accommodative esotropia as compared with 21% (14 of 67) and 33% (17 of 51), respectively, for those given full or partial refractive correction. For patients without amblyopia or strabismus at presentation, only 20% developed amblyopia and 35% esotropia. Strabismic patients responded well to treatment, with no cases developing partially accommodative strabismus requiring surgery during follow-up., Conclusions: In this case series we found a high prevalence of amblyopia and strabismus. The results support the importance of early preschool vision screening and spectacle correction of moderate to high hypermetropia (>+3.50 D) to reduce the risk of amblyopia, although more research is needed.

Purpose: To determine the efficacy of amblyopia treatment in children identified through a community photoscreening program., Design: Case series., Participants: We included 125 children diagnosed with amblyopia after referral from a photoscreening program., Methods: Retrospective chart review of 125 amblyopic children identified by photoscreening and treated in a single academic pediatric ophthalmology group practice. Treatment regimens included spectacles, patching, and/or atropine penalization. Successful treatment was defined as > or =3 Snellen line equivalent improvement in visual acuity and/or 20/30 visual acuity in the amblyopic eye in literate children. Successful treatment in initially preliterate children was defined as 20/30 or better visual acuity in the amblyopic eye., Main Outcome Measures: Percentage of successfully treated amblyopic children., Results: Of 901 children evaluated after being referred from photoscreening, 551 had amblyopiogenic risk factors without amblyopia, 185 were diagnosed with amblyopia, and 165 were false positives. Of 185 children with amblyopia, 125 met inclusion criteria for analysis and 78% (97 of 125) were successfully treated., Conclusions: The success rate of amblyopia treatment in children identified through our photoscreening program is high. This study supports the role of photoscreening programs in the prevention of amblyopia-related vision loss. Such early screening may translate to true visual acuity improvement., Financial Disclosure(s): The authors have no proprietary or commercial interest in any of the materials discussed in this article., (Copyright 2010 American Academy of Ophthalmology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To describe our experience using the Welch Allyn SureSight (Welch Allyn, Inc., Skaneateles Falls, NY) when vision screening a large population of preschool children. Additionally, we explore the usefulness of altering referral criteria to create high specificity for remote field screening in instances in which over-referral is costly., Methods: Preschool children were screened for amblyogenic factors with the SureSight. Referred children received a gold standard examination with American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus Vision Screening Committee-established failure criteria. Referral criteria were made increasingly more stringent to lower the rate of referral, and the effect on positive predictive value (PPV) was determined., Results: A total of 15,749 children were screened, with reliable screening obtained in >99%. Rowatt-modified Vision in Preschoolers Study referral criteria produced a referral rate of 7.3% and a PPV of 48.2%. The PPV was >70% for children with unreliable screenings and with estimated refractive errors exceeding the instrument's range. Altering referral criteria improved PPV until referral rate reached 4% (PPV approximately 64%); further refinement past this level did not increase PPV and, hence, inappropriately limited sensitivity., Conclusions: A good test instrument should have high PPV and a referral rate approaching the population disease. Although altering referral criteria to decrease referral rate also decreases sensitivity, it should improve PPV. The presence of an asymptotic limit to PPV means additional improvement in PPV cannot be obtained with this technology. Thus, SureSight's usefulness for high-specificity screening is limited; however, the current referral criteria are sufficient for large screening programs and provide an acceptable referral rate and PPV.

Purpose: To describe the use of photoscreening for preschool vision screening in several diverse locations throughout the world., Methods: The MTI photo screener was used to screen pre-verbal children; photographs were interpreted using standard criteria., Results: The Tennessee vision screening program remains successful, screening over 200,000 children during the past 8 years. Similar programs modeled across the United States have screened an additional 500,000 children. A pilot demonstration project in Hong Kong, Beijing, and Brazil screened over 5000 additional children with good success and appropriately low referral rates., Conclusion: Photoscreening can be an appropriate technique for widespread vision screening of preschool children throughout the world.

Introduction: The prospective Vision in Preschoolers (VIP) study evaluated 11 methods of screening and proposed referral criteria for the Welch Allyn SureSight(trade mark) Vision Screener with 90% and 94% specificity. The SureSight had a higher sensitivity than most other screening techniques when these criteria were applied. We evaluated the usefulness of these criteria in a field study of healthy preschool children., Methods: The SureSight software was altered to recommend referral using the VIP referral criteria with 90% specificity. Lions Club volunteers screened preschool children throughout Tennessee. Referred children underwent comprehensive eye examinations with cycloplegic refraction. Examination failure criteria were based upon published standards. Reanalysis using the 94% specificity criteria was then performed. Outcomes included referral rate and positive predictive value., Results: The SureSight was used to screen 4,733 children, and screening was successful in 99.7% of children. The referral rate using the 90% specificity criteria was 12.2%. Most children (73%) were referred for suspected astigmatism. The positive predictive value was 30%. Using the 94% specificity criteria from the VIP study decreased the referral rate to 7.9% and substantially decreased over referral for suspected astigmatism; however, several anisometropes went undetected. Higher specificity was achieved by raising astigmatism referral criteria to 2.2 diopters while leaving the anisometropia criteria unchanged., Conclusions: The SureSight can be used successfully for preschool screening in the field provided that criteria with high specificity are incorporated into the instrument's software program. Higher rates of positive predictive value can be achieved without jeopardizing sensitivity by raising astigmatism referral criteria to 2.2 diopters.

Introduction: Photoscreening programs for preschool vision screening have been promoted by Lions Clubs International Foundation (LCIF) via their 17 Core Four grant project awards since 1999. Results from 15 Core Four grant programs in the United States and one in Taiwan are presented here., Methods: Photoscreening was modeled after the Tennessee program and instituted statewide in each area. Programs were given latitude with respect to screening instrument and referral criteria, but a partnering academic institution and medical director were expected. Preschool children were screened by volunteers; referred children were examined by community optometrists and ophthalmologists who returned results to each program's coordinating center. Outcome data included number of children screened, referral rate, follow-up rate, and positive predictive value, which was generally determined using AAPOS-defined vision screening criteria., Results: All but one program used the MTI photoscreener (it chose not to participate); photoscreening referral criteria were standard for 13 programs. Through December 2004, more than 400,000 preschool children had been screened. The referral rate for programs using the MTI photoscreener averaged 5.2% (range, 3.7-12.6%). The predictive value of a positive photoscreen was 80%. Overall, 54% of referred children received follow-up examinations. Follow-up rate was the largest variable: 4 programs, screening nearly 250,000 children, had follow-up rates 70% or greater; 10 programs had follow-up data from fewer than 40% of referred children., Conclusions: Volunteer-led photoscreening programs can be instituted in other locations, including overseas, with high levels of effectiveness. Limitations include the possibility of poor success and variable attention to follow-up.

Introduction: State-wide cooperative programs for pediatric vision screening utilizing the MTI photoscreener and centralized interpretation were established in Alaska (The Alaska Blind Child Discovery, ABCD) and in Tennessee (Tennessee Lions Outreach)., Methods: Details of setup, implementation and interpretation of the state-wide MTI photoscreening programs are compared through 2002. The absolute numbers of children screened and the breakdown in interpretation categories are presented., Results: ABCD screened 14,000 children while Tennessee Lions screened 100,800. Similarities between ABCD and Tennessee programs were funded by Lions Clubs and other charitable and public health organizations, community screening and each had coordinated centralized image interpretation and notification. The programs differed by clinic focus (Tennessee Lions organized pre-schools while ABCD used village and community health fairs and schools), parent notification (Tennessee Lions communicated through pre- schools and ABCD mailed directly to parents), and image interpretation (Tennessee used VOIC age-based and pupil-size crescents while ABCD used "delta-center crescent"). Predictive value positive was 73% for Tennessee and 89% for ABCD. Tennessee achieved better followup on referrals after a specific coordinator was employed. Image interpretation breakdown for ABCD: Tennessee Lions Outreach were anisometropia (29%:34%), high hyperopia (33%:16%), astigmatism (18%:30%), strabismus (7%:15%), myopia (5%:2%), cataract (0.7%:0.2%). Two state-wide programs detected 3216 amblyopic children at a charity borne-cost of 1.5 million dollars. If the parents persisted with appropriate amblyopia therapy, the expected societal value was estimated at 17 million dollars. Lacking societal mandate and funding, these concerted charitable efforts only achieved a community penetration rate of 10% to 14%., Conclusion: National adoption of preschool vision screening by a method with similar or even better validity and cost effectiveness as MTI photoscreening, ideally in the pediatric medical home, is warranted.

Purpose: To compare the usefulness of traditional vision screening and photoscreening of 3- and 4-year-old children in the pediatrician's office., Methods: Following training of pediatricians and office staff, six pediatric clinics used both the MTI PhotoScreener (Medical Technology Industries, LLC, Riviera Beach, FL) and traditional acuity and stereopsis screening materials (HOTV charts/Random Dot E tests as recommended by established AAP-MCHB-PUPVS guidelines) during well-child exams. Clinics used one testing method for a 6-month period and switched to the other for the following 6 months, in a randomized manner. Referred children received a complete eye examination with cycloplegic refraction by local ophthalmologists or optometrists who forwarded the results to Vanderbilt Ophthalmology Outreach Center. Amblyogenic factors were defined using standardized published criteria., Results: Six hundred five children were screened with the photoscreener and 447 were screened with traditional techniques. Mean time for screening was less with the photoscreener: 2.5 versus 5.9 minutes ( P < 0.01). Untestable rates were similar (18% vs 10%, respectively P = NS), but higher with the photoscreener due to one clinic's 70% unreadable rate. Referral rates were also similar: 3.8% versus 4.5%. The positive predictive value (PPV) rate differed greatly. With follow-up results obtained from 56% of referred children, 73% of photoscreening referred children (8/11 examined) had amblyogenic factors confirmed on formal eye exams, whereas all children referred using traditional screening methods (10/10 examined) were normal., Conclusion: Photoscreening is more time efficient than traditional screening and has a significantly higher PPV in 3- and 4-year-old children. This study was unable to validate traditional screening techniques in this preschool age group. If these results can be replicated, support for traditional vision screening must undergo intense scrutiny, and attention should be turned toward making photoscreening feasible for widespread implementation.

Purpose: To determine the sensitivity of a unique pupil-size based set of referral criteria of the MTI PhotoScreener(Medical Technology and Innovations, Inc, Cedar Falls, Iowa) to detect high magnitude refractive error., Methods: The photoscreening photographs of 949 preschool children previously analyzed were reevaluated with the new referral criteria. The original photographs had been obtained from pediatricians' offices and public health and Women, Infants, and Children's (WIC) clinics. The results of this analysis were compared with the gold standard clinical examination and cycloplegic refraction. Sensitivities were calculated for amblyogenic factors based on the magnitude of the refractive error., Results: For 26 patients with anisometropia, the sensitivity to detect anisometropia increased from 46% for +1.25 or greater spherical interocular difference to 100% for +2.50 spherical intraocular difference. For 36 patients with hypermetropia in at least 1 meridian ranging from +3.75 to +7.50 D, sensitivity increased from 53% to detect +3.75 D or greater to 70% for +5.00 D or greater. The sensitivity to detect hypermetropia of +5.75 D or greater was 100%. These criteria detected 82% of patients with astigmatism greater than or equal to +3.00 D, and 100% of patients with astigmatism greater than +3.50 D., Conclusion: It is crucial that screening programs avoid over-referrals caused by high false-positive screening rates. The sensitivity of our new criteria increases with higher magnitude refractive error; patients with moderate and severe amblyogenic factors are almost never missed. While the sensitivity to detect lower magnitude refractive error is poor, the amblyogenic impact of such errors remains to be determined.