机构:[1]Beijing Tongren Eye Center, Beijing Tongren Hospital, Capital Medical University .Beijing Ophthalmology & Visual Sciences Key Laboratory, No.1 Dong Jiao Min Xiang, Beijing 100730, China首都医科大学附属北京同仁医院临床科室眼科斜视与小儿眼科
Background: Decreased best corrected visual acuity among children should be treated early in life, and vision screening in schoolchildren is an efficient and feasible selection for developing countries. Thus, the screening accuracy of different visual acuity tests is the key point for making vision screening strategies. The present study aims to explore the screening accuracy of uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA) and pin-hole corrected visual acuity (PCVA) using different vision chart in the detection of decreased best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) among schoolchildren. Methods: Grade one primary schoolchildren in urban Lhasa with data of UCVA using tumbling E chart (UCVAE), PCVA using tumbling E chart (PCVAE), UCVA using Lea Symbols chart (UCVAL), PCVA using Lea Symbols chart (PCVAL) and BCVA using Lea Symbols chart were reviewed. Decreased BCVA was defined as BCVA <= 20/32(>= 0.2 logMAR). Difference, reliability, and diagnostic parameters in the detection of decreased BCVA of different visual acuity results were analyzed. Results: Overall, 1672 children aged 6.58 +/- 0.44 years fulfilling the criteria. The prevalence of decreased BCVA was 6.8%. Although no significant differences were found between UCVAE vs UCVAL (p = .84, paired t-test) as well as PCVAE vs PCVAL (p = .24), the ICC between them was low (0.68 and 0.57, respectively). The average difference between BCVA and UCVAE, UCVAL, PCVAE, PCVAL was log MAR -0.08 (- 0.37, 0.21), - 0.08 (- 0.29, 0.17), - 0.05 (- 0.30, 0.19), - 0.06 (- 0.23, 0.12) using Bland-Altman method. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of UCVAE, PCVAE, UCVAL, PCVAL for the detection of decreased BCVA was 0.78 (0.73, 0.84), 0.76 (0.71, 0.82), 0.95 (0.94, 0.96), 0.93 (0.91, 0.95), respectively. Conclusion: Pinhole does not increase the screening accuracy of detecting decreased BCVA in grade one primary schoolchildren. Visual acuity test using Lea Symbols is more efficient than Tumbling E in the screening of that age.
基金:
Open Research Fund from Beijing Advanced
Innovation Center for Big Data-Based Precision Medicine, Beijing Tongren
Hospital,Beihang University & Capital Medical University (BHTR-KFJJ-202013);
Capital Health Development Special Fund of China -Major Project (SF-2018-
1-2051); Capital Health Development Special Fund of China -Youth Project
(2018–4-1083); High Level Health Technical Talent Training Program of Beijing
Municipal Health Bureau (2015–3-023); Beijing Municipal Science & Technology
Commission (Z171100001017066)
第一作者机构:[1]Beijing Tongren Eye Center, Beijing Tongren Hospital, Capital Medical University .Beijing Ophthalmology & Visual Sciences Key Laboratory, No.1 Dong Jiao Min Xiang, Beijing 100730, China
通讯作者:
推荐引用方式(GB/T 7714):
Chen Weiwei,Fu Jing,Sun Ali,et al.Pinhole does not increase screening accuracy of detecting decreased best corrected visual acuity in schoolchildren[J].BMC OPHTHALMOLOGY.2021,21(1):doi:10.1186/s12886-021-02150-8.
APA:
Chen, Weiwei,Fu, Jing,Sun, Ali,Li, Lei,Sun, Yunyun&Meng, Zhaojun.(2021).Pinhole does not increase screening accuracy of detecting decreased best corrected visual acuity in schoolchildren.BMC OPHTHALMOLOGY,21,(1)
MLA:
Chen, Weiwei,et al."Pinhole does not increase screening accuracy of detecting decreased best corrected visual acuity in schoolchildren".BMC OPHTHALMOLOGY 21..1(2021)