期刊论文详细信息
BMC Ophthalmology
Pinhole does not increase screening accuracy of detecting decreased best corrected visual acuity in schoolchildren
Jing Fu1  Weiwei Chen1  Lei Li1  Ali Sun1  Yunyun Sun1  Zhaojun Meng1 
[1] Beijing Tongren Eye Center, Beijing Tongren Hospital, Capital Medical University; Beijing Ophthalmology & Visual Sciences Key Laboratory, No.1 Dong Jiao Min Xiang, 100730, Beijing, China;
关键词: Sensitivity;    Specificity;    Decreased best-corrected visual acuity;    Vision screening;    Schoolchildren;   
DOI  :  10.1186/s12886-021-02150-8
来源: Springer
PDF
【 摘 要 】

BackgroundDecreased 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.MethodsGrade 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.ResultsOverall, 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 logMAR -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.ConclusionPinhole 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.Trial registrationData were maily from the Lhasa Childhood Eye Study which has finished the clinical registration on (ChiCTR1900026693).

【 授权许可】

CC BY   

【 预 览 】
附件列表
Files Size Format View
RO202203042285174ZK.pdf 968KB PDF download
  文献评价指标  
  下载次数:1次 浏览次数:1次