Search

A policy statement describing the use of automated vision screening technology (instrument-based vision screening) is presented. Screening for amblyogenic refractive error with instrument-based screening is not dependent on behavioral responses of children, as when visual acuity is measured. Instrument-based screening is quick, requires minimal cooperation of the child, and is especially useful in the preverbal, preliterate, or developmentally delayed child. Children younger than 4 years can benefit from instrument-based screening, and visual acuity testing can be used reliably in older children. Adoption of this new technology is highly dependent on third-party payment policies, which could present a significant barrier to adoption.

Learning disabilities, including reading disabilities, are commonly diagnosed in children. Their etiologies are multifactorial, reflecting genetic influences and dysfunction of brain systems. Learning disabilities are complex problems that require complex solutions. Early recognition and referral to qualified educational professionals for evidence-based evaluations and treatments seem necessary to achieve the best possible outcome. Most experts believe that dyslexia is a language-based disorder. Vision problems can interfere with the process of learning; however, vision problems are not the cause of primary dyslexia or learning disabilities. Scientific evidence does not support the efficacy of eye exercises, behavioral vision therapy, or special tinted filters or lenses for improving the long-term educational performance in these complex pediatric neurocognitive conditions. Diagnostic and treatment approaches that lack scientific evidence of efficacy, including eye exercises, behavioral vision therapy, or special tinted filters or lenses, are not endorsed and should not be recommended.

Red reflex testing is an essential component of the neonatal, infant, and child physical examination. This statement, which is a revision of the previous policy statement published in 2002, describes the rationale for testing, the technique used to perform this examination, and the indications for referral to an ophthalmologist experienced in the examination of children.

We developed and validated the Jaeb Visual Acuity Screener (JVAS), a computerized visual acuity-based screening program for children that employs a rapid, age-specific, standardized algorithm for vision screening in the medical home that is available for download at no cost.A total of 175 children aged 3 to8 (median, 6) years were screened with the JVAS before undergoing a complete eye examination (gold standard). The JVAS presented 2 large single surround optotypes (20/100 and 20/80) and then 5 optotypes at a predetermined, age-specific normal threshold. Failure on the gold standard examination was determined using recently published referral criteria and published visual acuity norms for age. We evaluated the sensitivity and specificity of the JVAS for detecting reduced visual acuity, amblyopia, and amblyopia risk factors. JVAS pass/fail paradigms evaluated were inability to identify 3 of 4, 3 of 5, and 4 of 5 age-appropriate optotype presentations.Screening testability for the JVAS was high, at 100%. Sensitivity of the JVAS ranged from 88% to 91%, and specificity from 73% to 86%, with positive predictive value ranging from 66% to 79% and negative predictive value from 92% to 93% (ranges reflect different pass/fail paradigms).The new JVAS provides an effective and practical method for screening 3- to 7-year-olds using any Windows-based computer. Providing the JVAS free-of-charge to pediatricians and school systems would standardize currently fragmented visual acuity-based screening practices.

Retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) remains a significant threat to vision for extremely premature infants despite the availability of therapeutic modalities capable, in most cases, of managing this disorder. It has been shown in many controlled trials that application of therapies at the appropriate time is essential to successful outcomes in premature infants affected by ROP. Bedside binocular indirect ophthalmoscopy has been the standard technique for diagnosis and monitoring of ROP in these patients. However, implementation of routine use of this screening method for at-risk premature infants has presented challenges within our existing care systems, including relative local scarcity of qualified ophthalmologist examiners in some locations and the remote location of some NICUs. Modern technology, including the development of wide-angle ocular digital fundus photography, coupled with the ability to send digital images electronically to remote locations, has led to the development of telemedicine-based remote digital fundus imaging (RDFI-TM) evaluation techniques. These techniques have the potential to allow the diagnosis and monitoring of ROP to occur in lieu of the necessity for some repeated on-site examinations in NICUs. This report reviews the currently available literature on RDFI-TM evaluations for ROP and outlines pertinent practical and risk management considerations that should be used when including RDFI-TM in any new or existing ROP care structure.

The American Academy of Pediatrics, with the collaboration of the Surgical Sections of the American Academy of Pediatrics, has created referral recommendations intended to serve as voluntary practice parameters to assist general pediatricians in determining when and to whom to refer their patients for pediatric surgical specialty care. It is recognized that these recommendations may be difficult to implement, because communities vary in terms of access to major pediatric medical centers. Limited access does not negate the value of the recommendations, however, because the child who needs specialized surgical and anesthetic care is best served by the skills of the appropriate pediatric surgical team. Major congenital anomalies, malignancies, major trauma, and chronic illnesses (including those associated with preterm birth) in infants and children should be managed by pediatric medical subspecialists and pediatric surgical specialists at pediatric referral centers that can provide expertise in many areas, including the pediatric medical subspecialties and surgical specialties of pediatric radiology, pediatric anesthesiology, pediatric pathology, and pediatric intensive care. The optimal management of the child with complex problems, chronic illness, or disabilities requires coordination, communication, and cooperation of the pediatric surgical specialist with the child’s primary care pediatrician or physician.

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.

We studied two patients who had infantile malignant osteopetrosis, severe visual loss, and diminished electroretinogram amplitudes with visible macular chorioretinal degenerative changes. The findings support the hypothesis that a subgroup of patients with infantile malignant osteopetrosis exists in whom the visual loss is caused by a primary retinal degeneration that may be associated with generalized central nervous system neuronal degeneration.

A mblyopia is a significant public health problem. Most studies estimate that the prevalence is in the neighborhood of 2% to 5%. In fact, amblyopia is the leading cause of monocular vision loss in the United States in people younger than 40 years. During the past 5 years, many prospective studies have indicated that treatment of amblyopia in young children is highly successful, confirming the results from retrospective studies and reinforcing what we as pediatric ophthalmologists have known for years. These studies culminated in the prospective Amblyopia Treatment Study, which demonstrated that more than 75% of amblyopic children younger than 7 years can have significant improvement in the amblyopic eye (to 20/30 or better) as a result of treatment. Results of other studies, conducted in the United States and abroad, have indicated that vision screening is successful in detecting amblyopia and that treatment of amblyopia is costeffective. As a result, preschool vision screening is receiving increased emphasis by the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Academy of Ophthalmology, and the federal government. In the past, vision screening for preschool children has employed traditional subjective visual acuity–based methods to evaluate visual function. These tests typically involve reading optotypes—such as Allen Symbols, LEA figures, HOTV Letters, and Snellen Acuity—using numbers or letters. The advantage of these optotype visual acuity–based techniques for preschool vision screening is that they provide a direct, rather than indirect, measure of visual function. However, successful screening by means of optotype visual acuity testing requires an older and more cooperative child and is less effective in younger children who have limited attention spans. Furthermore, results of this testing are highly dependent on the skills and experience of the examiner. Most techniques for traditional vision screening have never been adequately validated with large-scale prospective studies using lay personnel or pediatric nurses in the field. Such a study, the NEI (National Eye Institute)–sponsored Vision in Preschoolers (VIP) study is underway and seeks to do just that. Newer technologies, specifically photoscreening but also automated refraction, have prompted a re-evaluation of preschool vision screening. In fact, the American Academy of Pediatrics recently released a position statement generally supporting the use of photoscreening technology for preschool vision screening. However, instead of detecting amblyopia directly, these newer technologies detect problems associated with the development of amblyopia. These abnormalities, specifically certain levels of refractive error, are termed “amblyogenic factors.” A significant problem with screening techniques that detect amblyogenic factors rather than amblyopia is that not all patients with amblyogenic factors develop amblyopia, and the natural history of many amblyogenic factors is not well understood. However, the risk of developing amblyopia appears to increase along with the magnitude of amblyogenic factors. The introduction of these new techniques for preschool vision screening has produced an interest in comparing these techniques with traditional vision screening. However, clear interpretation of these comparisons is clouded by a lack of a uniform and consistent definition of amblyopia risk factors (ie, the report of the sensitivity and specificity of one instrument may not use the same magnitude of various refractive errors that a report on a different [or even the same] instrument did). Often this leads to a comparison of “apples with oranges.” A related problem is that manufacturers, always cognizant of liability concerns, seek to develop instruments that have high levels of sensitivity (i.e., that will detect all children with a potential problem). However, health care administrators, insurers, From Vanderbilt University School of Medicine,a Nashville, Tennessee; Ophthalmic Associates, Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus,b Anchorage, Alaska; and The Permanente Medical Group,c Sacramento, California. Submitted April 4, 2003. Revision accepted May 21, 2003. Reprint requests: Sean P. Donahue, MD, PhD, Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, 8000 Medical Center East, Nashville, Tennessee 37232-8808. Copyright © 2003 by the American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus. 1091-8531/2003/$35.00 0 doi:10.1016/S1091-8531(03)00182-4

To compare patching and atropine as treatments for moderate amblyopia in children younger than 7 years.In a randomized clinical trial, 419 children younger than 7 years with amblyopia and visual acuity in the range of 20/40 to 20/100 were assigned to receive either patching or atropine at 47 clinical sites.Visual acuity in the amblyopic eye and sound eye after 6 months.Visual acuity in the amblyopic eye improved in both groups (improvement from baseline to 6 months was 3.16 lines in the patching group and 2.84 lines in the atropine group). Improvement was initially faster in the patching group, but after 6 months, the difference in visual acuity between treatment groups was small and clinically inconsequential (mean difference at 6 months, 0.034 logMAR units; 95% confidence interval, 0.005-0.064 logMAR units). The 6-month acuity was 20/30 or better in the amblyopic eye and/or improved from baseline by 3 or more lines in 79% of the patching group and 74% of the atropine group. Both treatments were well tolerated, although atropine had a slightly higher degree of acceptability on a parental questionnaire. More patients in the atropine group than in the patching group had reduced acuity in the sound eye at 6 months, but this did not persist with further follow-up.Atropine and patching produce improvement of similar magnitude, and both are appropriate modalities for the initial treatment of moderate amblyopia in children aged 3 to less than 7 years.

We commend the recent recommendation by the US Preventative Services Task Force (USPSTF) for vision screening of all children at least once between the ages of 3 and 5 years.1 Amblyopia is the leading cause of monocular visual impairment in US children. Several high-quality, randomized controlled clinical studies have shown that amblyopia treatment is highly successful.2 Early detection is critical, because there is a window for successful treatment. Hence, this recommendation is an important step toward the elimination of a major preventable cause of lifelong visual loss. The USPSTF recommendation is consistent with the American Academy of Pediatrics “Recommendations for Preventive Pediatric Health Care,”3 and Bright Futures Guidelines for Health Supervision of Infants Children and Adolescents ,4 both of which recommend universal screening for vision at the 3-, 4-, and 5-year health supervision visits. Although we support the task force recommendation to provide vision screening for children aged 3 to 5 years, we are concerned about the finding of “insufficient evidence” (I) for screening children under the age of 3. Figure 1 in the recommendation1 notes that current practice for these younger children is “assessment … Address correspondence to Sean P. Donahue, MD, PhD, Departments of Pediatrics, Ophthalmology, and Neurology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center/Vanderbilt Eye Institute, 2311 Pierce Ave, Nashville, TN 37232-8808. E-mail: sean.donahue{at}vanderbilt.edu

Red reflex examination is recommended for all infants. This statement describes the indications for and the technique to perform this examination, including indications for dilation of the pupils before examination and indications for referral to an ophthalmologist.

This statement asserts that all children should be screened for risk factors associated with amblyopia. Guidelines are suggested for the use of photoscreening as a technique for the detection of amblyopia and strabismus in children of various age groups. The American Academy of Pediatrics favors additional research of the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of photoscreening as a vision screening tool.

We reviewed three representative cases of chronic corneal fistula formation and provide a systematic approach to the assessment and therapeutic alternatives for this problem. In two of our patients, the fistula was managed surgically. The third patient developed endophthalmitis, which resulted in loss of light perception. Chronic corneal fistulization is a rare clinical entity resulting from malapposition of corneal tissue after traumatic, surgical, or infectious perforation. Fistulas may result in prolonged or recurrent hypotony, peripheral anterior synechia formation, or endophthalmitis. Accurate assessment of the risks associated with corneal fistula formation takes into account the type of fistula, its location in the cornea, and the condition of the ocular adnexae. We reviewed the risk factors that will determine the urgency and type of therapy used.

Automated static threshold perimetry was performed in both eyes of 10 normal and 12 ocular hypertensive subjects treated with a topical beta-blocker, before and after Goldmann applanation tonometry of their right eyes. Both objective statistical comparison and subjective evaluation of the resultant visual fields showed no detrimental effect on visual field test results after applanation tonometry.