Search

Aim: This study aimed to determine adherence with follow‐up from the New Zealand pre‐school vision screening programme. The study also examined associations between pre‐school vision screening outcomes and cognitive measures assessed at the 54‐month follow‐up in the Growing Up in New Zealand study cohort. Methods: A cross‐sectional retrospective record review of pre‐school vision screening outcomes and hospital ophthalmology records with linkage to Growing Up in New Zealand cohort study data. Results: Of 176 children referred from vision screening, 21.6% did not attend a referral appointment. Of 138 children who attended a referral appointment, 21.0% did not attend one or more follow‐up appointments. Ethnic differences were observed in attendance at referral appointments (attended Māori 13%, Pacific 22.5%, European/Other 64.5%; not attended Māori 26.3%, Pacific 28.9%, European/Other 44.7%; P = 0.04) and follow‐up appointments (attended Māori 11.9%, Pacific 15.6%, European/Other 72.5%; not attended Māori 17.2%, Pacific 48.3%, European/Other 34.5%; P = 0.001). Vision screening outcome was significantly associated with letter naming fluency scores (P = 0.01) but not name and numbers scores (P = 0.05). Conclusions: Non‐attendance at referral and follow‐up appointments limits the efficacy of vision screening, particularly for children of Māori and Pacific ethnicity. Children referred from vision screening achieve lower scores on letter naming fluency, a key predictor of reading ability in later childhood. Equity‐based improvements are required to ensure that all children referred from vision screening receive appropriate follow‐up eye care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The leaders of optometry schools in Australia and New Zealand/Aotearoa aim to establish a Leaders in Indigenous Optometry Education Network (LIOEN) dedicated to strengthening Indigenous eye care through better educating [...]

Access to culturally safe health services is a basic human right, however through the lasting effects of colonisation, oppression, and systemic racism, the individual and community health of Indigenous peoples in Australia and Aotearoa New Zealand have been severely impacted. The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Health and Cultural Safety Strategy of the Australian Health Practitioners Regulation Agency, and the Standards of Cultural Competence and Cultural Safety of the Optometrists and Dispensing Opticians Board of New Zealand, recognise the importance of access to safe health care for Aboriginal, Torres Strait Islander and Māori patients, which encompasses both clinical competency and cultural safety. Universities have an ongoing responsibility to ensure their learning and teaching activities result in graduates being able to provide culturally safe practice. This article highlights the emergence of culturally safe practices in the Australian and Aotearoa New Zealand optometry curricula over the last five years incorporating Indigenous ways of knowing, being and doing into the curricula, understanding the local Indigenous histories and contexts, the adoption of online cultural education modules, and clinical placement partnerships with local Indigenous communities. Whilst there is still much work to do to achieve the goal of graduating culturally safe optometrists, this paper focuses on features that enable or impede progress in the development of culturally safe practices within the optometry programmes to improve eye health equity for Indigenous recognise the diversity of Indigenous cultures across Australia and NZ. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Keywords: First Nations Eye Care; Maori Eye Care; Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Eye Care; Cultural safety in optometry; Culturally safe eye care EN First Nations Eye Care Maori Eye Care Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Eye Care Cultural safety in optometry Culturally safe eye care 211 214 4 03/08/23 20230301 NES 230301 Introduction Australian and New Zealand Indigenous cultures are instantly recognisable in any international forum. To reach parity for our populations (3.3% Aboriginal and Torres strait Islander[14]and 17.1% Maori,[15] we need 199 Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander practitioners in Australia and 147 Maori practitioners in Aotearoa/New Zealand. Maori Eye Care, First Nations Eye Care, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Eye Care, Cultural safety in optometry, Culturally safe eye care. [Extracted from the article]

Purpose: Mild to moderate vision loss affects many children and can negatively impact a child's early literacy and academic achievement. Nevertheless, there is no consensus on which factors present in early childhood indicate the need for long‐term ophthalmic follow up, particularly in children with a history of perinatal adversity. This study identified the relationship between visual, cognitive, motor and demographic factors at 2 years of age and visual acuity (VA) and stereoacuity at 4.5 years of age. Methods: Five hundred sixteen children identified as being at risk of neonatal hypoglycaemia were recruited soon after birth. At 2 years of age, binocular VA, stereoacuity and non‐cycloplegic refraction were measured and a clinical neuro‐developmental assessment with the Bayley Scales of Infant Development III (BSID‐III) was conducted by a trained examiner. Monocular VA and stereoacuity were measured at 4.5 years of age. Results: Three hundred twenty‐eight children completed both the 2 and 4.5 year vision and neurodevelopmental assessments. Multiple linear regression showed oblique astigmatism and motor function at 2 years were significantly associated with VA at 4.5 years of age, while spherical equivalent refraction, motor scores and stereoacuity at 2 years were significantly associated with stereoacuity at 4.5 years of age. BSID‐III motor scores had the best sensitivity (81.8%) and specificity (51.5%) for identifying impaired stereoacuity at 4.5 years. However, all measures at 2 years were poorly associated with VA at 4.5 years old. Conclusion: Vision and neurodevelopmental measures at 2 years were poorly associated with visual function at 4.5 years of age. However, lower scores on tests of motor function at 2 years may be associated with vision abnormalities, particularly reduced stereopsis, at 4.5 years of age and referral for comprehensive vision assessment for these children may be warranted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: There is currently insufficient evidence to recommend vision screening for children < 36 months of age. This study assessed the effect of comprehensive vision screening, as well as the sensitivity of age-appropriate vision tests, at two years of age on habitual visual acuity at 4.5 years of age.Methods: Children born at risk of neonatal hypoglycaemia (n = 477) underwent vision assessment at 54 ± 2 months of age including measurement of monocular and binocular habitual visual acuity, assessment of binocularity and stereopsis. Of these children, 355 (74.4 per cent) had also received vision screening at two years of age (mean age = 24± 1 months), while 122 were not screened.Results: Eighty (16.8 per cent) children were classified as having reduced vision at 4.5 years of age, but the prevalence of reduced vision did not differ between children who had previously been screened at two years of age and those who had not (15.5 per cent versus 20.5 per cent, p = 0.153). However, children with reduced vision at 4.5 years of age were more likely to have had visual abnormalities requiring referral detected at two years of age (p = 0.02). Visual acuity and mean spherical equivalent autorefraction measurements were also worse (higher values) in two-year-old children who were later classified with reduced habitual visual acuity (p = 0.031 and p = 0.001, respectively). Nevertheless, unaided binocular visual acuity, non-cycloplegic refractive error, and stereopsis at two years all showed poor sensitivity and specificity for predicting visual outcomes at 4.5 years of age.Conclusion: Our findings do not support the adoption of early vision screening in children as current vision tests suitable for use with two-year-old children have poor sensitivity for predicting mild-moderate habitual vision impairment at 4.5 years of age. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]