Dataset Information

Testing Pediatric Acuity With an iPad: Validation of "Peekaboo Vision" in Malawi and the UK.

ABSTRACT: Purpose:To evaluate two builds of the digital grating acuity test, "Peekaboo Vision" (PV), in young (6-60 months) populations in two hospital settings (Malawi and United Kingdom). Methods:Study 1 evaluated PV in Blantyre, Malawi (N = 58, mean age 33 months); study 2 evaluated an updated build in Glasgow, United Kingdom (N = 60, mean age 44 months). Acuities were tested-retested with PV and Keeler Acuity Cards for Infants (KACI). Bland-Altman techniques were used to compare results and repeatability. Child engagement was compared between groups. Study 2 included test-time comparison. Results:Study 1 (Malawi): The mean difference between PV and KACI was 0.02 logMAR with 95% limits of agreement (LoA) of 0.33 to 0.37 LogMAR. On test-retest, PV demonstrated 95% LoA of -0.283 to 0.198 logMAR with coefficient of repeatability (CR) 0.27. KACI demonstrated 95% LoA of -0.427 to 0.323 logMAR, and larger CR was 0.37. PV evidenced higher engagement scores than KACI (P = 0.0005). Study 2 (UK): The mean difference between PV and KACI was 0.01 logMAR; 95% LoA was -0.413 to 0.437 logMAR. Again, on test-retest, PV had narrower LoA (-0.344 to 0.320 logMAR) and lower CR (0.32) versus KACI, with LoA -0.432 to 0.407 logMAR, CR 0.42. The two tests did not differ in engagement score (P = 0.5). Test time was ?1 minute shorter for PV (185 vs. 251 s, P = 0.0021). Conclusions:PV gives comparable results to KACI in two pediatric populations in two settings, with benefits in repeatability indices and test duration. Translational Relevance:Leveraging tablet technology extends reliable infant acuity testing to bedside, home, and rural settings, including areas where traditional equipment cannot be financed.

SUBMITTER: Livingstone I

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6327755 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Testing Pediatric Acuity With an iPad: Validation of "Peekaboo Vision" in Malawi and the UK.

Livingstone Iain I Butler Laura L Misanjo Esther E Lok Alan A Middleton Duncan D Wilson Janice Waterson JW Delfin Silvija S Kayange Petros P Hamilton Ruth R

Translational vision science & technology 20180109 1

<h4>Purpose</h4>To evaluate two builds of the digital grating acuity test, "Peekaboo Vision" (PV), in young (6-60 months) populations in two hospital settings (Malawi and United Kingdom).<h4>Methods</h4>Study 1 evaluated PV in Blantyre, Malawi (<i>N</i> = 58, mean age 33 months); study 2 evaluated an updated build in Glasgow, United Kingdom (<i>N</i> = 60, mean age 44 months). Acuities were tested-retested with PV and Keeler Acuity Cards for Infants (KACI). Bland-Altman techniques were used to c ...[more]

PMID: 30637178

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundSelf-reported questions on blindness and vision problems are collected in many national surveys. Recently released surveillance estimates on the prevalence of vision loss used self-reported data to predict variation in the prevalence of objectively measured acuity loss among population groups for whom examination data are not available. However, the validity of self-reported measures to predict prevalence and disparities in visual acuity has not been established.ObjectiveThis study aimed to estimate the diagnostic accuracy of self-reported vision loss measures compared to best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), inform the design and selection of questions for future data collection, and identify the concordance between self-reported vision and measured acuity at the population level to support ongoing surveillance efforts.MethodsWe calculated accuracy and correlation between self-reported visual function versus BCVA at the individual and population level among patients from the University of Washington ophthalmology or optometry clinics with a prior eye examination, randomly oversampled for visual acuity loss or diagnosed eye diseases. Self-reported visual function was collected via telephone survey. BCVA was determined based on retrospective chart review. Diagnostic accuracy of questions at the person level was measured based on the area under the receiver operator curve (AUC), whereas population-level accuracy was determined based on correlation.ResultsThe survey question, "Are you blind or do you have serious difficulty seeing, even when wearing glasses?" had the highest accuracy for identifying patients with blindness (BCVA ≤20/200; AUC=0.797). The highest accuracy for detecting any vision loss (BCVA <20/40) was achieved by responses of "fair," "poor," or "very poor" to the question, "At the present time, would you say your eyesight, with glasses or contact lenses if you wear them, is excellent, good, fair, poor, or very poor" (AUC=0.716). At the population level, the relative relationship between prevalence based on survey questions and BCVA remained stable for most demographic groups, with the only exceptions being groups with small sample sizes, and these differences were generally not significant.ConclusionsAlthough survey questions are not considered to be sufficiently accurate to be used as a diagnostic test at the individual level, we did find relatively high levels of accuracy for some questions. At the population level, we found that the relative prevalence of the 2 most accurate survey questions were highly correlated with the prevalence of measured visual acuity loss among nearly all demographic groups. The results of this study suggest that self-reported vision questions fielded in national surveys are likely to yield an accurate and stable signal of vision loss across different population groups, although the actual measure of prevalence from these questions is not directly analogous to that of BCVA.

Project description:BackgroundThis study evaluated two models of routine HIV testing of hospitalized children in a high HIV-prevalence resource-constrained African setting. Both models incorporated "task shifting," or the allocation of tasks to the least-costly, capable health worker.Methods and findingsTwo models were piloted for three months each within the pediatric department of a referral hospital in Lilongwe, Malawi between January 1 and June 30, 2008. Model 1 utilized lay counselors for HIV testing instead of nurses and clinicians. Model 2 further shifted program flow and advocacy responsibilities from counselors to volunteer parents of HIV-infected children, called "patient escorts." A retrospective review of data from 6318 hospitalized children offered HIV testing between January-December 2008 was conducted. The pilot quarters of Model 1 and Model 2 were compared, with Model 2 selected to continue after the pilot period. There was a 2-fold increase in patients offered HIV testing with Model 2 compared with Model 1 (43.1% vs 19.9%, p<0.001). Furthermore, patients in Model 2 were younger (17.3 vs 26.7 months, p<0.001) and tested sooner after admission (1.77 vs 2.44 days, p<0.001). There were no differences in test acceptance or enrollment rates into HIV care, and the program trends continued 6 months after the pilot period. Overall, 10244 HIV antibody tests (4779 maternal; 5465 child) and 453 DNA-PCR tests were completed, with 97.8% accepting testing. 19.6% of all mothers (n = 1112) and 8.5% of all children (n = 525) were HIV-infected. Furthermore, 6.5% of children were HIV-exposed (n = 405). Cumulatively, 72.9% (n = 678) of eligible children were evaluated in the hospital by a HIV-trained clinician, and 68.3% (n = 387) successfully enrolled into outpatient HIV care.Conclusions/significanceThe strategy presented here, task shifting from lay counselors alone to lay counselors and patient escorts, greatly improved program outcomes while only marginally increasing operational costs. The wider implementation of this strategy could accelerate pediatric HIV care access in high-prevalence settings.

Dataset Information

Testing Pediatric Acuity With an iPad: Validation of "Peekaboo Vision" in Malawi and the UK.

Publications

Testing Pediatric Acuity With an iPad: Validation of "Peekaboo Vision" in Malawi and the UK.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets