Evaluation of the Spot Vision Screener in young children in Costa Rica

Mendez, Maricela Arana; Arguello, Leslie; Martínez, José Belmonte; Vargas, Marisela Salas; Rodriguez, Ana Maria Alvarado; Papa, Carrie; Peterseim, Carolyn; Víquez, Mauricio Otárola; Trivedi, Rupal H.; Peterseim, Mae Millicent W.

doi:10.1016/j.jaapos.2015.08.002

Cited by 37 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There were two articles without full text and most of them were recorded in the Embase database exclusively. After detailed assessment with eligibility criteria, 21 publications with a total of 5022 subjects were included in the final meta‐analysis . Details of the 21 articles are summarised in Table .…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Diagnostic test accuracy of Spot and Plusoptix photoscreeners in detecting amblyogenic risk factors in children: a systemic review and meta‐analysis

Zhang

Wang

Liu

et al. 2019

Ophthalmic Physiologic Optic

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Amblyopia is a permanent visual impairment developed in early childhood. Recently, instrument‐based photoscreeners have been widely used for vision screening to detect amblyopia risk factors, which is key for the prevention and treatment of amblyopia. This meta‐analysis aims to evaluate the diagnostic test accuracy of Spot and Plusoptix photoscreeners in detecting risk factors for amblyopia in children. Methods An electronic literature search was performed in October 2018 using the MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science databases. Twenty‐one publications with a total of 5022 subjects were included. Subjects given a comprehensive examination were considered to have amblyopia or amblyogenic risk factors based on the American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus (AAPOS) referral criteria guidelines. Results The overall sensitivity for Spot and Plusoptix was 87.7% and 89.4%, respectively (p = 0.38); the specificity was 78.0% and 89.9%, respectively (p = 0.90). For subjects under 7 years old (preschool children), the overall sensitivity for Spot and Plusoptix was 91.7% and 90.2%, respectively (p = 0.81); the specificity was 82.6% and 93.0%, respectively (p = 0.46). Conclusion Both Spot and Plusoptix photoscreeners demonstrated good sensitivity and specificity in detecting amblyopia risk factors in children, especially at preschool ages. There was no significant difference in diagnostic test accuracy between them.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Diagnostic test accuracy of Spot and Plusoptix photoscreeners in detecting amblyogenic risk factors in children: a systemic review and meta‐analysis

Zhang

Wang

Liu

et al. 2019

Ophthalmic Physiologic Optic

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Different criteria have been proposed to improve the screening outcomes. Some devices follow the AAPOS referral criteria; however, other devices use different referral criteria, for example, Rowat criteria, VIP criteria, 2 manufacturer criteria, 20 , 24 or their own referral criteria. 9 , 23 The lack of uniformity in referral criteria comparison between devices and studies difficult.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Images can be obtained rapidly with multiple readings in three different meridians in just 2 seconds, and the device shows one of the several messages: “all measurements within range”, “complete eye exam recommended”, “pupils too small”, “pupils not found”, “out of range”, or “continue attempting to obtain a reading”. 14 , 20 , 32 …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Other battery-powered devices, for example, the SureSight autorefractor or Spot photoscreener, have showed 18 great applicability in reducing the number of children who did not receive the recommended preschool vision exam in settings with high prevalence of astigmatism (Native American, in particular) 19 or rural populations. 20 – 23 …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Advantages, limitations, and diagnostic accuracy of photoscreeners in early detection of Amblyopia: a review

Sánchez¹,

Ortiz-Toquero²,

Martín³

et al. 2016

OPTH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Amblyopia detection is important to ensure proper visual development and avoid permanent decrease of visual acuity. This condition does not produce symptoms, so it is difficult to diagnose if a vision problem actually exists. However, because amblyopia treatment is limited by age, early diagnosis is of paramount relevance. Traditional vision screening (conducted in <3 years) is related with difficulty in getting cooperation from a subject to conduct the eye exam, so accurate objective methods to improve amblyopia detection are necessary. Handheld devices used for photoscreening or autorefraction could offer advantages to improve amblyopia screening because they reduce exploration time to just few seconds, no subject collaboration is needed, and they provide objective information. The purpose of this review is to summarize the main functions and clinical applicability of commercially available devices for early detection of amblyopia and to describe their differences, advantages, and limitations. Although the studies reviewed are heterogeneous (due to wide differences in referral criteria, use of different risk factors, different types of samples studied, etc), these devices provide objective measures in a quick and objective way with a simple outcome report: retest, pass, or refer. However, due to major limitations, these devices are not recommended, and their use in clinical practice is limited.

show abstract

“…Atkinson J et al first explored the utility of refraction testing using a photorefractor in vision screening [13,14]. Recently, a handheld photo-refractor with software for the detection of abnormal refraction (i.e., the type that may cause amblyopia) has become commercially available [15][16][17][18] that reportedly reduce the effects of accommodation on refraction, relative to those encountered when using conventional handheld autorefractors that require patients to gaze into a target inside the instrument [19]. However, autorefractors (including the photorefractor) cannot completely eliminate the effects of accommodation on refraction without the use of cycloplegics.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Biometry: a tool for the detection of amblyopia risk factor in children

Satou

Niida

Ito

2019

Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose To determine optical biometry data criteria for the detection of abnormal refraction in preschool children, and to evaluate the accuracy of these criteria for detecting amblyopia refractive risk factor (ARF), as defined in the 2013 guidelines of the American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus (AAPOS). Methods The present study included 200 eyes of 100 preschool children with normal eyes for the experimental determination of criteria and 142 eyes of 71 preschool children for validation of these criteria. Statistical data from normal eyes were used to determine both Bhigh sensitivity failure criterion^and Bhigh specificity failure criterion^associated with corneal astigmatism, interocular difference in axial length, and the prediction interval of a regression formula for predicting corneal power from axial length. Ophthalmological examination of children for validation included testing cycloplegic refraction and optical biometry testing. Outcomes from optical biometry criteria were compared with determination via ophthalmological examination, and the accuracy of the criteria for detecting ARF was evaluated. Results Sensitivity of the Bhigh sensitivity failure criterion^for detecting 2013 AAPOS ARF was 100%, while the specificity was 80.5%. The sensitivity of the Bhigh specificity failure criterion^was 93.3%, while the specificity was 95.1%. Conclusions The criteria derived from optical biometry data in this study exhibited excellent sensitivity and specificity for detecting ARF. This study may lead to a new approach to vision screening in preschool children.

show abstract

Evaluation of the Spot Vision Screener in young children in Costa Rica

Cited by 37 publications

References 9 publications

Diagnostic test accuracy of Spot and Plusoptix photoscreeners in detecting amblyogenic risk factors in children: a systemic review and meta‐analysis

Diagnostic test accuracy of Spot and Plusoptix photoscreeners in detecting amblyogenic risk factors in children: a systemic review and meta‐analysis

Advantages, limitations, and diagnostic accuracy of photoscreeners in early detection of Amblyopia: a review

Biometry: a tool for the detection of amblyopia risk factor in children

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About