Vision Screening in the Pediatrician’s Office

Natario L. Couser, Fatema Q. Esmail, Amy K. Hutchinson

The Department of Ophthalmology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, USA..

DOI: 10.4236/ojoph.2012.22003                

Abstract

Objective: To assess current practices, attitudes, and perceived barriers toward pediatric vision screening. Patients and Methods: A link to a 9-question survey was electronically distributed to a national sample of 6000 pediatricians through Medical Marketing Services Inc. Data were collected using Survey Monkey. Results: Email open rate was 11%; 37% of those who opened the email responded (225 respondents). Over ninety percent of respondents perform some type of vision screening at least yearly, although age at which screening began varied, with two thirds of respondents instituting formal vision screening after three years. Fifty eight percent of respondents were either extremely unsatisfied, unsatisfied or only somewhat satisfied with their current screening method. Preferred methods of screening and confidence of pediatricians in their ability to detect pathology varied for children under versus over age three. The least frequently used methods for all age groups were autorefraction and photoscreening. The most commonly reported barriers to screening were inadequate training (48%), time required for exam (42%), and inadequate reimbursement (32%). Conclusions: Perceived barriers to vision screening in the pediatrician office have been previously identified, and photoscreening and autorefraction have been identified as a possible means to circumvent them. In spite of the addition of new procedural codes, pediatricians continue to report similar barriers to screening.

Keywords

Pediatric Vision Screening; Barriers; Reimbursement; Pediatricians; Photoscreening; Autorefraction; U.S. Preventative Services Task Force; CPT 99174

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

[1]	Us Preventive Services Task Force, “Vision Screening for Children 1 to 5 Years of Age: Us Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement,” Pediatrics, Vol. 127, No. 2, 2011, pp. 340-346. doi:10.1542/peds.2010-3177
[2]	S. P. Donahue and J. B. Ruben, “US Preventive Services Task Force Vision Screening Recommendations,” Pediatrics, Vol. 127, No. 3, 2011, pp. 569-570. doi:10.1542/peds.2011-0020
[3]	A. R. Kemper and S. J. Clark, “Preschool Vision Screening in Pediatric Practices,” Clinical Pediatrics, Vol. 45, No. 3, 2006, pp. 263-266. doi:10.1177/000992280604500309
[4]	American Academy of Pediatrics, “Eye Examination in Infants, Children, and Young Adults by Pediatricians,” Pediatrics, Vol. 111, No. 4, 2003, pp. 902-907.
[5]	J. M. Holmes, et al., “The Treatment of Amblyopia,” Strabismus, Vol. 14, No. 1, 2006, pp. 37-42. doi:10.1080/09273970500536227
[6]	J. H. Membreno, et al., “A Cost-Utility Analysis of Ther- apy for Amblyopia,” Ophthalmology, Vol. 109, No. 12, 2002, pp. 2265-2271. doi:10.1016/S0161-6420, 02)01286-1
[7]	A. Leon, et al., “The Age-Dependent Effect of Anisometropia Magnitude on Anisometropic Amblyopia Severity,” Journal of AAPOS: The Official Publication of the American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus/American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus, Vol. 12, No. 2, 2008, pp. 150-156.
[8]	D. Friedburg and K. P. Kloppel, “Early Correction of Hyperopia and Astigmatism in Children Leads to Better Development of Visual Acuity,” Klinische Monatsblatter fur Augenheilkunde, Vol. 209, No. 1, 1996, pp. 21-24. doi:10.1055/s-2008-1035271
[9]	J. D. Colburn, et al., “Longitudinal Follow-Up of Hypermetropic Children Identified during Preschool Vision Screening,” Journal of Aapos : The Official Publication of the American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabis-mus/American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus, Vol. 14, No. 3, 2010, pp. 211-215.
[10]	B. W. Arthur, et al., “Field Testing of the Plusoptix S04 Photoscreener,” Journal of Aapos: The Official Publication of the American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus/American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus, Vol. 13, No. 1, 2009, pp. 51-57.
[11]	N. S. Matta, et al., “Comparison between the PlusoptiX and MTI Photoscreeners,” Archives of Ophthalmology, Vol. 127, No. 12, 2009, pp. 1591-1595. doi:10.1001/archophthalmol.2009.294
[12]	N. S. Matta, E. L. Singman and D. I. Silbert, “Performance of The Plusoptix S04 Photoscreener for the Detection of Amblyopia Risk Factors in Children Aged 3 to 5,” Journal of Aapos: The Official Publication of the American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabis-mus/American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus, Vol. 14, No. 2, 2010, pp. 147-149.
[13]	S. P. Donahue, et al., “Lions Clubs International Foundation Core Four Photoscreening: Results from 17 Programs and 400,000 Preschool Children,” Journal of Aapos: The Official Publication of the American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus/American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmol-ogy and Strabismus, Vol. 10, No. 1, 2006, pp. 44-48.
[14]	A. J. Rowatt, et al., “Field Evaluation of the Welch Allyn Suresight Vision Screener: Incorporating the Vision in Preschoolers Study Recommendations,” Journal of Aapos: The Official Publication of the American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabis-mus/American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus, Vol. 11, No. 3, 2007, pp. 243-248.
[15]	S. Q. Longmuir, et al., “Nine-Year Results of a Volunteer Lay Network Photoscreening Program of 147 809 Children Using a Photoscreener in Iowa,” Ophthalmology, Vol. 117, No. 10, 2010, pp. 1869-1875. doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2010.03.036