The PlusoptiX Photoscreener and the Retinomax Autorefractor as Community-based Screening Devices for Preschool Children

ABSTRACT

Purpose: To compare the performance of the PlusoptiX S12 mobile photoscreener and the Retinomax K+3 Autorefractor as screening devices in preschool children.

Methods: Children ranging from 3 to 5 years of age from 11 San Diego County preschools underwent vision screening in their schools where ambient light could not always be controlled using both the Retinomax and the PlusoptiX. Cycloplegic refraction on the consented children was subsequently performed on the UCSD EyeMobile for children on-site at the school locations.

Results: A total of 321 children were screened with the PlusoptiX and Retinomax. The PlusoptiX referred 22% of children, of whom 70% of the referrals were read as “unable”. The Retinomax referred 13% and there were no “unables”. Similar results occurred in the cycloplegic-refracted 182 consented children—64% of the PlusoptiX referrals were read as “unable” . Only one third of these “unables” required glasses. Both devices referred the four children with amblyopia and one case of strabismus. However, PlusoptiX’s 3 false negatives had amblyopia risk factors (ARFs) while the one Retinomax’s false negative did not have ARFs.

The Retinomax screening had 95% sensitivity and 94% specificity. The PlusoptiX screening had 86% sensitivity and 84% specificity.

Conclusion: In this preschool population and environment, the PlusoptiX referred 63% more than the Retinomax in addition to a lower specificity and sensitivity. Adjusting PlusoptiX referral criteria might not substantially improve the specificity of the PlusoptiX due to the high numbers of “unables”.

KEYWORDS:

• Vision screening
• Amblyopia
• Retinomax
• PlusoptiX

Declaration of interest

The authors report no conflicts of interest