| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||||
Correspondence: Requests for reprints should be addressed to: Gun Kvarnström, Orthoptist, Ph.D., University Hospital, S-58185 Linköping, Sweden. e-mail: gunkvarnstrom{at}hotmail.com
Background and Purpose: Does screening/treatment reduce amblyopia and is it worth doing it?
Materials: All children (3126) born in 1982 have been followed from birth to ten years. The second study was an investigation of four Low Vision Centers to see how many persons become visual handicapped due to amblyopia.
Methods: Up to the age of 4, inspection of the eyes and ocular alignment is performed at the Child Health Care Centers. At the age of 4 years, visual acuity is measured at the centers and at school at the ages of 7 and 10 years. All patients at four Low Vision Centers have been investigated with regard to amblyopia. These patients have not been screened or treated for amblyopia. From these two studies, we compare the costs of screening and no screening.
Results: The prevalence of ametropia in the population was 7.7%, and strabismus 3.1%. The prevalence of deep amblyopia (visual acuity 
0.3) has been reduced from 2% to 0.2%. Results from the four Swedish Low Vision Centers showed that amblyopia was the main cause of decreased visual acuity in one eye in at least 1.72% of the patients. The cost for these people is higher then the cost for screening and treatment.
Conclusion: Visual screening is effective in detecting visual and ocular disorders. The prevalence of amblyopia is greatly reduced with screening. The benefits greatly outweighs the economical disadvantages of screening and treating amblyopic children.
Key words: screening, treatment, amblyopia, visual impairment, cost
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
