Cargando…
Should tumbling E go out of date in amblyopia screening? Evidence from a population-based sample normative in children aged 3–4 years
AIMS: To determine a normative of tumbling E optotype and its feasibility for visual acuity (VA) assessment in children aged 3-4 years. METHODS: A cross-sectional study of 1756 children who were invited to participate in a comprehensive non-invasive eye exam. Uncorrected monocular VA with crowded tu...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5969336/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28988161 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bjophthalmol-2017-310691 |
_version_ | 1783325950744723456 |
---|---|
author | Guimaraes, Sandra Fernandes, Tiago Costa, Patrício Silva, Eduardo |
author_facet | Guimaraes, Sandra Fernandes, Tiago Costa, Patrício Silva, Eduardo |
author_sort | Guimaraes, Sandra |
collection | PubMed |
description | AIMS: To determine a normative of tumbling E optotype and its feasibility for visual acuity (VA) assessment in children aged 3-4 years. METHODS: A cross-sectional study of 1756 children who were invited to participate in a comprehensive non-invasive eye exam. Uncorrected monocular VA with crowded tumbling E with a comprehensive ophthalmological examination were assessed. Testability rates of the whole population and VA of the healthy children for different age subgroups, gender, school type and the order of testing in which the ophthalmological examination was performed were evaluated. RESULTS: The overall testability rate was 95% (92% and 98% for children aged 3 and 4 years, respectively). The mean VA of the first-day assessment (first-VA) and best-VA over 2 days’ assessments was 0.14 logMAR (95% CI 0.14 to 0.15) (decimal=0.72, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.73) and 0.13 logMAR (95% CI 0.13 to 0.14) (decimal=0.74, 95% CI 0.73 to 0.74). Analysis with age showed differences between groups in first-VA (F(3,1146)=10.0; p<0.001; η2=0.026) and best-VA (F(3,1155)=8.8; p<0.001; η2=0.022). Our normative was very highly correlated with previous reported HOTV-Amblyopia-Treatment-Study (HOTV-ATS) (first-VA, r=0.97; best-VA, r=0.99), with 0.8 to 0.7 lines consistent overestimation for HOTV-ATS as described in literature. Overall false-positive referral was 1.3%, being specially low regarding anisometropias of ≥2 logMAR lines (0.17%). Interocular difference ≥1 line VA logMAR was not associated with age (p=0.195). CONCLUSIONS: This is the first normative for European Caucasian children with single crowded tumbling E in healthy eyes and the largest study comparing 3 and 4 years old testability. Testability rates are higher than found in literature with other optotypes, especially in children aged 3 years, where we found 5%–11% better testability rates. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5969336 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-59693362018-06-01 Should tumbling E go out of date in amblyopia screening? Evidence from a population-based sample normative in children aged 3–4 years Guimaraes, Sandra Fernandes, Tiago Costa, Patrício Silva, Eduardo Br J Ophthalmol Clinical Science AIMS: To determine a normative of tumbling E optotype and its feasibility for visual acuity (VA) assessment in children aged 3-4 years. METHODS: A cross-sectional study of 1756 children who were invited to participate in a comprehensive non-invasive eye exam. Uncorrected monocular VA with crowded tumbling E with a comprehensive ophthalmological examination were assessed. Testability rates of the whole population and VA of the healthy children for different age subgroups, gender, school type and the order of testing in which the ophthalmological examination was performed were evaluated. RESULTS: The overall testability rate was 95% (92% and 98% for children aged 3 and 4 years, respectively). The mean VA of the first-day assessment (first-VA) and best-VA over 2 days’ assessments was 0.14 logMAR (95% CI 0.14 to 0.15) (decimal=0.72, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.73) and 0.13 logMAR (95% CI 0.13 to 0.14) (decimal=0.74, 95% CI 0.73 to 0.74). Analysis with age showed differences between groups in first-VA (F(3,1146)=10.0; p<0.001; η2=0.026) and best-VA (F(3,1155)=8.8; p<0.001; η2=0.022). Our normative was very highly correlated with previous reported HOTV-Amblyopia-Treatment-Study (HOTV-ATS) (first-VA, r=0.97; best-VA, r=0.99), with 0.8 to 0.7 lines consistent overestimation for HOTV-ATS as described in literature. Overall false-positive referral was 1.3%, being specially low regarding anisometropias of ≥2 logMAR lines (0.17%). Interocular difference ≥1 line VA logMAR was not associated with age (p=0.195). CONCLUSIONS: This is the first normative for European Caucasian children with single crowded tumbling E in healthy eyes and the largest study comparing 3 and 4 years old testability. Testability rates are higher than found in literature with other optotypes, especially in children aged 3 years, where we found 5%–11% better testability rates. BMJ Publishing Group 2018-06 2017-10-07 /pmc/articles/PMC5969336/ /pubmed/28988161 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bjophthalmol-2017-310691 Text en © Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2018. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted. This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ |
spellingShingle | Clinical Science Guimaraes, Sandra Fernandes, Tiago Costa, Patrício Silva, Eduardo Should tumbling E go out of date in amblyopia screening? Evidence from a population-based sample normative in children aged 3–4 years |
title | Should tumbling E go out of date in amblyopia screening? Evidence from a population-based sample normative in children aged 3–4 years |
title_full | Should tumbling E go out of date in amblyopia screening? Evidence from a population-based sample normative in children aged 3–4 years |
title_fullStr | Should tumbling E go out of date in amblyopia screening? Evidence from a population-based sample normative in children aged 3–4 years |
title_full_unstemmed | Should tumbling E go out of date in amblyopia screening? Evidence from a population-based sample normative in children aged 3–4 years |
title_short | Should tumbling E go out of date in amblyopia screening? Evidence from a population-based sample normative in children aged 3–4 years |
title_sort | should tumbling e go out of date in amblyopia screening? evidence from a population-based sample normative in children aged 3–4 years |
topic | Clinical Science |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5969336/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28988161 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bjophthalmol-2017-310691 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT guimaraessandra shouldtumblingegooutofdateinamblyopiascreeningevidencefromapopulationbasedsamplenormativeinchildrenaged34years AT fernandestiago shouldtumblingegooutofdateinamblyopiascreeningevidencefromapopulationbasedsamplenormativeinchildrenaged34years AT costapatricio shouldtumblingegooutofdateinamblyopiascreeningevidencefromapopulationbasedsamplenormativeinchildrenaged34years AT silvaeduardo shouldtumblingegooutofdateinamblyopiascreeningevidencefromapopulationbasedsamplenormativeinchildrenaged34years |