liu.seSearch for publications in DiVA
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Preventable vision loss in children: a public health concern?
Linköping University, Department of Neuroscience and Locomotion, Ophthalmology. Östergötlands Läns Landsting, Reconstruction Centre, Department of Ophthalmology UHL. Linköping University, Faculty of Health Sciences.
Linköping University, Department of Neuroscience and Locomotion, Ophthalmology. Östergötlands Läns Landsting, Reconstruction Centre, Department of Ophthalmology UHL. Linköping University, Faculty of Health Sciences.
2006 (English)In: American Orthoptic Journal, ISSN 0065-955X, Vol. 56, no 1, 3-6 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

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.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2006. Vol. 56, no 1, 3-6 p.
National Category
Medical and Health Sciences
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-35994DOI: 10.3368/aoj.56.1.3Local ID: 29268OAI: oai:DiVA.org:liu-35994DiVA: diva2:256842
Note

Presented as part of a Symposium at the Joint Meeting of the American Orthoptic Council, the American Association of Certified Orthoptists, and the American Academy of Ophthalmology, Chicago, Illinois, October 16, 2005.

Available from: 2009-10-10 Created: 2009-10-10 Last updated: 2012-10-30

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full text

Authority records BETA

Kvarnström, GunJakobsson, PeterDahlgaard, Jens Jörn

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Kvarnström, GunJakobsson, PeterDahlgaard, Jens Jörn
By organisation
OphthalmologyDepartment of Ophthalmology UHLFaculty of Health Sciences
Medical and Health Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 66 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf