Download PDF
CC BY 4.0 · Journal of Child Science 2021; 11(01): e110-e113
DOI: 10.1055/s-0041-1728731
Original Article

Assessment of the Utility of Plusoptix A09 Handheld Photo-refractometer in Screening Refractory Errors and Amblyopia in Children

Muhammed Selcuk Sinanoglu 
1   Department of Paediatrics, İnönü University Faculty of Medicine, Turgut Ozal Medical Centre Malatya, Turkey
,
Yakıncı Cengiz
1   Department of Paediatrics, İnönü University Faculty of Medicine, Turgut Ozal Medical Centre Malatya, Turkey
,
Soner Demirel
2   Department of Eye Diseases, İnönü University Faculty of Medicine, Turgut Ozal Medical Centre Malatya, Turkey
› Author Affiliations Funding The research was funded by the Research Projects Unit with project number 2012/151.
› Further Information
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

The aim of this study is to find out the frequency of anisometropic amblyopia in children and to increase awareness about this disease. All children between the ages of 4 and 10 years who were attending 11 kindergarten and primary schools determined by provincial directorate for national education in the center of Malatya were included. A screening team including interns and a resident from the Department of Pediatrics have used Plusoptix A09 handheld photo-refractometer device for detecting amblyopia and its reasons. A total of 7,000 students were screened. The mean age of the students was 7.4 ± 2 years. Amblyopia was suspected in 357 cases with the Plusoptix S09 screening. After eye examinations performed by an ophthalmologist, 303 cases were found to have pathologic eye examination. Amblyopia was found in 67 (18.8%) of the 303 cases, and anisometropic amblyopia was found in 59 of 67 cases. As a result of the screening, sensitivity of Plusoptix A09 was found to be 88.1%, while its specificity was found to be 88.6%. Its positive predictive value was found to be 64.0% and its negative predictive value was found to be 97.0%. We believe that with screenings performed by health professionals who are given short-term training by using a device that can conduct remote measurements, detection of anisometropic amblyopia, which is the most frequent reason for amblyopia, can be done in a fast and relatively less expensive way and with the minimum number of specialist physician required. This way, children with amblyopia can reach the ophthalmologist earlier for treatment.

Keywords

screening - amblyopia - photo-refractometer

Author Contributions

The contributions of the authors are as follows—concept: M. S. S. and C. Y.; design: C. Y. and S. D.; supervision: C. Y.; data collection and/or processing: M. S. S. and S. D.; analysis and/or interpretation: S. D. and M. S. S; literature review: M. S. S. and C. Y.; writing: M. S. S. and C. Y.; critical review: C. Y. and S. D.




Publication History

Received: 28 January 2021

Accepted: 09 March 2021

Article published online:
01 June 2021

© 2021. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, permitting unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction so long as the original work is properly cited. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

 

  • References

  • 1 Mazow ML, Chuang A, Vital MC, Prager T. 1999 Costenbader Lecture. Outcome study in amblyopia: treatment and practice pattern variations. J AAPOS 2000; 4 (01) 1-9
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Ekinci ÖF, Mirza E, Telcioğlu G, Doğu S. Kayseri ili merkez ilkokullarında kırma kusurları, şaşılık, ambliyopi ve konverjans yetmezliği yönünden bir araştırma. 23. Ulusal Türk Oft Kong Bült Adana, 1989: 392-395
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Ozan N, Ökten Z, Erda S. İlkokul çocuklarında ambliyopi sıklığı nedenleri. 20. Ulusal Türk Oftalmoloji Kongre Bülteni, Bursa, 1987: 323-326
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Erdem Ü, Mutlu MF. Okul öncesi çocuklarda ambliyopi prevalansı ve nedenlerinin araştırılması. Turk Silahli Kuvvetleri Koruyucu Hekim Bul 2004; 3: 9
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Akyol N, Sezer E, Aslan L, Oğuzöncül F, Dinç E. Elazığ il merkezinde ambliyopi ve ambliyojenik faktörlerin prevalansı üzerine bir çalışma. Türkiye Klinikleri Oftalmoloji 2000; 9: 77-82
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Sanaç AŞ. Ambliyopi ve tedavisi. Şaşılık ve tedavisi. In: 2. baskı. Ankara: Pelin Ofset ve Tipo Matbaacılık; 2001: 75-121 , 235–267
    Google Scholar
  • 7 Gunter K, von Noorden GK. Esodeviations. Binocular vision and ocular motility. Saint Louis: 1995: 290-335
    Google Scholar
  • 8 von Noorden GK. Amblyopia: a multidisciplinary approach. Proctor lecture. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1985; 26 (12) 1704-1716
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Sjöstrand J, Abrahamsson M. Risk factors in amblyopia. Eye (Lond) 1990; 4 (Pt 6): 787-793
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Barnes GR, Hess RF, Dumoulin SO, Achtman RL, Pike GB. The cortical deficit in humans with strabismic amblyopia. J Physiol 2001; 533 (Pt 1): 281-297
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Campos E. Amblyopia. Surv Ophthalmol 1995; 40 (01) 23-39
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Dandona R, Dandona L. Refractive error blindness. Bull World Health Organ 2001; 79 (03) 237-243
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Koçak G, Duranoğlu Y. Ambliyopi ve Tedavisi. Turk J Ophthalmol 2014; 44: 228-236
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Turaçli ME, Aktan SG, Dürük K. Ophthalmic screening of school children in Ankara. Eur J Ophthalmol 1995; 5 (03) 181-186
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Kalikivayi V, Naduvilath TJ, Bansal AK, Dandona L. Visual impairment in school children in southern India. Indian J Ophthalmol 1997; 45 (02) 129-134
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Yazawa K, Suga J, Wakita S, Sumitomo M, Uemura Y. The Tokyo Metropolitan home vision screening program for amblyopia in 3-year-old children. Am J Ophthalmol 1992; 114 (04) 416-419
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Helveston EM. The incidence of amblyopia ex anopsia in young adult males in Minnesota in 1962–63. Am J Ophthalmol 1965; 60: 75-77
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Hopkisson B, Clarke JR, Oelman BJ. Residual amblyopia in recruits to the British Army. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed) 1982; 285 (6346): 940
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Attebo K, Mitchell P, Cumming R, Smith W, Jolly N, Sparkes R. Prevalence and causes of amblyopia in an adult population. Ophthalmology 1998; 105 (01) 154-159
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Juárez-Muñoz IE, Rodríguez-Godoy ME, Guadarrama-Sotelo ME, Guerrero-Anaya M, Mejía-Arangúre JM, Sciandra-Rico M. Incidence of common ophthalmological disorders in preschool children in Mexico City [in Spanish]. Salud Publica Mex 1996; 38 (03) 212-216
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Rahi JS, Williams C, Bedford H, Elliman D. Screening and surveillance for ophthalmic disorders and visual deficits in children in the United Kingdom. Br J Ophthalmol 2001; 85 (03) 257-259
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Steele G, Ireland D, Block S. Cycloplegic autorefraction results in pre-school children using the Nikon Retinomax Plus and the Welch Allyn SureSight. Optom Vis Sci 2003; 80 (08) 573-577
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Ayse YK, Onder U, Suheyla K. Accuracy of Plusoptix S04 in children and teens. Can J Ophthalmol 2011; 46 (02) 153-157
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Sachdev N, Cairns G, McGhee CN. A comparison of autorefractor performance. Optom Vis Sci 2005; 82 (01) 9 , author reply 9–10
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Yan XR, Jiao WZ, Li ZW, Xu WW, Li FJ, Wang LH. Performance of the Plusoptix A09 photoscreener in detecting amblyopia risk factors in Chinese children attending an eye clinic. PLoS One 2015; 10 (06) e0126052
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar