AimTo present and evaluate a new screening protocol for amblyopia in preschool children.MethodsZagreb Amblyopia Preschool Screening (ZAPS) study protocol performed screening for amblyopia by near and distance visual acuity (VA) testing of 15 648 children aged 48-54 months attending kindergartens in the City of Zagreb County between September 2011 and June 2014 using Lea Symbols in lines test. If VA in either eye was >0.1 logMAR, the child was re-tested, if failed at re-test, the child was referred to comprehensive eye examination at the Eye Clinic.Results78.04% of children passed the screening test. Estimated prevalence of amblyopia was 8.08%. Testability, sensitivity, and specificity of the ZAPS study protocol were 99.19%, 100.00%, and 96.68% respectively.ConclusionThe ZAPS study used the most discriminative VA test with optotypes in lines as they do not underestimate amblyopia. The estimated prevalence of amblyopia was considerably higher than reported elsewhere. To the best of our knowledge, the ZAPS study protocol reached the highest sensitivity and specificity when evaluating diagnostic accuracy of VA tests for screening. The pass level defined at ≤0.1 logMAR for 4-year-old children, using Lea Symbols in lines missed no amblyopia cases, advocating that both near and distance VA testing should be performed when screening for amblyopia.

No abstract

AimTo evaluate the primary health care information system from the general practitioner's (GP) point of view.MethodsSixty-seven Croatian GPs were distributed a questionnaire about characteristics of the GP’s office, overall impression of the application, handling of daily routine information, more sophisticated information needs, and data security, and rated their satisfaction with each component from 1 to 5. We also compared two most frequently used applications – application with distantly installed software (DIS) and that with locally installed software (LIS, personal computer-based application).ResultsGPs were most satisfied with the daily procedures and the reminder component of the health information system (rating 4.1). The overall impression ranked second (3.5) and flexibility of applications followed closely (3.4). The most questionable aspect of applications was data security (3.0). LIS system received better overall rate than DIS (4.2 vs 3.2).ConclusionApplications received better ratings for daily routine use than for overall impression and ability to get specific information according the GPs’ needs. Poor ratings on the capability of the application, complaints about unreliable links, and doubts about data security point to a need for more user-friendly interfaces, more information on the capability of the application, and a valid certificate of assessment for every application.

No abstract