Cargando…

Scope and costs of autorefraction and photoscreening for childhood amblyopia—a systematic narrative review in relation to the EUSCREEN project data

BACKGROUND: Amblyopia screening can target reduced visual acuity (VA), its refractive risk factors, or both. VA testing is imprecise under 4 years of age, so automated risk-factor photoscreening appears an attractive option. This review considers photoscreening used in community services, focusing o...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Horwood, Anna M., Griffiths, Helen J., Carlton, Jill, Mazzone, Paolo, Channa, Arinder, Nordmann, Mandy, Simonsz, Huibert J.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Nature Publishing Group UK 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8026636/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33257800
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41433-020-01261-8
_version_ 1783675690396155904
author Horwood, Anna M.
Griffiths, Helen J.
Carlton, Jill
Mazzone, Paolo
Channa, Arinder
Nordmann, Mandy
Simonsz, Huibert J.
author_facet Horwood, Anna M.
Griffiths, Helen J.
Carlton, Jill
Mazzone, Paolo
Channa, Arinder
Nordmann, Mandy
Simonsz, Huibert J.
author_sort Horwood, Anna M.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Amblyopia screening can target reduced visual acuity (VA), its refractive risk factors, or both. VA testing is imprecise under 4 years of age, so automated risk-factor photoscreening appears an attractive option. This review considers photoscreening used in community services, focusing on costs, cost-effectiveness and scope of use, compared with EUSCREEN project Country Reports describing how photo- and automated screening is used internationally. METHODS: A systematic narrative review was carried out of all English language photoscreening literature to September 10th 2018, using publicly available search terms. Where costs were considered, a CASP economic evaluation checklist was used to assess data quality. RESULTS: Of 370 abstracts reviewed, 55 reported large-scale community photoscreening projects. Five addressed cost-effectiveness specifically, without original data. Photoscreening was a stand-alone, single, test event in 71% of projects. In contrast, 25 of 45 EUSCREEN Country Reports showed that if adopted, photoscreening often supplements other tests in established programmes and is rarely used as a stand-alone test. Reported costs varied widely and evidence of cost-effectiveness was sparse in the literature, or in international practice. Only eight (13%) papers compared the diagnostic accuracy or cost-effectiveness of photoscreening and VA testing, and when they did, cost-effectiveness of photoscreening compared unfavourably. DISCUSSION: Evidence that photoscreening reduces amblyopia or strabismus prevalence or improves overall outcomes is weak, as is evidence of cost-effectiveness, compared to later VA screening. Currently, the most cost-effective option seems to be a later, expert VA screening with the opportunity for a re-test before referral.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8026636
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Nature Publishing Group UK
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-80266362021-04-21 Scope and costs of autorefraction and photoscreening for childhood amblyopia—a systematic narrative review in relation to the EUSCREEN project data Horwood, Anna M. Griffiths, Helen J. Carlton, Jill Mazzone, Paolo Channa, Arinder Nordmann, Mandy Simonsz, Huibert J. Eye (Lond) Review Article BACKGROUND: Amblyopia screening can target reduced visual acuity (VA), its refractive risk factors, or both. VA testing is imprecise under 4 years of age, so automated risk-factor photoscreening appears an attractive option. This review considers photoscreening used in community services, focusing on costs, cost-effectiveness and scope of use, compared with EUSCREEN project Country Reports describing how photo- and automated screening is used internationally. METHODS: A systematic narrative review was carried out of all English language photoscreening literature to September 10th 2018, using publicly available search terms. Where costs were considered, a CASP economic evaluation checklist was used to assess data quality. RESULTS: Of 370 abstracts reviewed, 55 reported large-scale community photoscreening projects. Five addressed cost-effectiveness specifically, without original data. Photoscreening was a stand-alone, single, test event in 71% of projects. In contrast, 25 of 45 EUSCREEN Country Reports showed that if adopted, photoscreening often supplements other tests in established programmes and is rarely used as a stand-alone test. Reported costs varied widely and evidence of cost-effectiveness was sparse in the literature, or in international practice. Only eight (13%) papers compared the diagnostic accuracy or cost-effectiveness of photoscreening and VA testing, and when they did, cost-effectiveness of photoscreening compared unfavourably. DISCUSSION: Evidence that photoscreening reduces amblyopia or strabismus prevalence or improves overall outcomes is weak, as is evidence of cost-effectiveness, compared to later VA screening. Currently, the most cost-effective option seems to be a later, expert VA screening with the opportunity for a re-test before referral. Nature Publishing Group UK 2020-11-30 2021-03 /pmc/articles/PMC8026636/ /pubmed/33257800 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41433-020-01261-8 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
spellingShingle Review Article
Horwood, Anna M.
Griffiths, Helen J.
Carlton, Jill
Mazzone, Paolo
Channa, Arinder
Nordmann, Mandy
Simonsz, Huibert J.
Scope and costs of autorefraction and photoscreening for childhood amblyopia—a systematic narrative review in relation to the EUSCREEN project data
title Scope and costs of autorefraction and photoscreening for childhood amblyopia—a systematic narrative review in relation to the EUSCREEN project data
title_full Scope and costs of autorefraction and photoscreening for childhood amblyopia—a systematic narrative review in relation to the EUSCREEN project data
title_fullStr Scope and costs of autorefraction and photoscreening for childhood amblyopia—a systematic narrative review in relation to the EUSCREEN project data
title_full_unstemmed Scope and costs of autorefraction and photoscreening for childhood amblyopia—a systematic narrative review in relation to the EUSCREEN project data
title_short Scope and costs of autorefraction and photoscreening for childhood amblyopia—a systematic narrative review in relation to the EUSCREEN project data
title_sort scope and costs of autorefraction and photoscreening for childhood amblyopia—a systematic narrative review in relation to the euscreen project data
topic Review Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8026636/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33257800
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41433-020-01261-8
work_keys_str_mv AT horwoodannam scopeandcostsofautorefractionandphotoscreeningforchildhoodamblyopiaasystematicnarrativereviewinrelationtotheeuscreenprojectdata
AT griffithshelenj scopeandcostsofautorefractionandphotoscreeningforchildhoodamblyopiaasystematicnarrativereviewinrelationtotheeuscreenprojectdata
AT carltonjill scopeandcostsofautorefractionandphotoscreeningforchildhoodamblyopiaasystematicnarrativereviewinrelationtotheeuscreenprojectdata
AT mazzonepaolo scopeandcostsofautorefractionandphotoscreeningforchildhoodamblyopiaasystematicnarrativereviewinrelationtotheeuscreenprojectdata
AT channaarinder scopeandcostsofautorefractionandphotoscreeningforchildhoodamblyopiaasystematicnarrativereviewinrelationtotheeuscreenprojectdata
AT nordmannmandy scopeandcostsofautorefractionandphotoscreeningforchildhoodamblyopiaasystematicnarrativereviewinrelationtotheeuscreenprojectdata
AT simonszhuibertj scopeandcostsofautorefractionandphotoscreeningforchildhoodamblyopiaasystematicnarrativereviewinrelationtotheeuscreenprojectdata
AT scopeandcostsofautorefractionandphotoscreeningforchildhoodamblyopiaasystematicnarrativereviewinrelationtotheeuscreenprojectdata