• Users Online: 42944
  • Home
  • Print this page
  • Email this page

   Table of Contents      
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2014  |  Volume : 62  |  Issue : 12  |  Page : 1152-1155

Development of Pocket Vision Screener and its effectiveness at screening visual acuity deficits


Srimathi Sundari Subramanian Department of Visual Psychophysics, Elite School of Optometry, Unit of Medical Research Foundation, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India

Date of Submission03-Apr-2014
Date of Acceptance23-Jul-2014
Date of Web Publication12-Jan-2015

Correspondence Address:
Monica Raja
Elite School of Optometry, 8; GST Road, St. Thomas Mount, Chennai, Tamil Nadu
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: Medical/Vision Research Foundation, Chennai, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/0301-4738.149137

Rights and Permissions
  Abstract 

Aim: The aim was to construct a visual acuity chart and find its effectiveness at screening visual acuity deficits. Materials and Methods: Two phases were involved in this study.Construction of the screener: Ten Sloan letters (C, D, H, K, N, O, R, S, V, and Z) were selected and the letters were constructed and reduced to 0.2 logMAR acuity size (6.92 mm) for viewing at 3 m. The screener contains three lines with seven letters in each. Few combinations of the seven letter sequences were chosen based on the row legibility scores. Three seven letter combinations close to the median of all combinations were selected, such that maximum difficulty score difference between the lines are <1%. Finding the effectiveness of the screener: 100 literate subjects with unaided visual acuity better than or equal to 6/60 were recruited for the study. Unaided visual acuity was tested using both the newly constructed Pocket Vision Screener and a logMAR visual acuity chart and the time taken to measure the visual acuity using both the charts was noted. Results: The mean age of the subjects was 43 ± 17 years. Subjects were classified as normal or deficient based on the logMAR visual acuity measurement. The screener was found to have 81% sensitivity, 94% specificity. The positive and negative predictive values were found to be 91% and 87%, respectively. A significant difference (P < 0.001) was found in the time taken to record visual acuity using both the charts. Conclusion: The Pocket Vision Screener can be used as a quick and accurate tool to screen subjects for visual acuity deficits, being highly sensitive, specific, and cost-effective.

Keywords: Crowding, logMAR chart, refractive error, screening, visual acuity


How to cite this article:
Raja M, Ramamurthy D, Srinivasan K, Varadharajan L S. Development of Pocket Vision Screener and its effectiveness at screening visual acuity deficits. Indian J Ophthalmol 2014;62:1152-5

How to cite this URL:
Raja M, Ramamurthy D, Srinivasan K, Varadharajan L S. Development of Pocket Vision Screener and its effectiveness at screening visual acuity deficits. Indian J Ophthalmol [serial online] 2014 [cited 2024 Mar 29];62:1152-5. Available from: https://journals.lww.com/ijo/pages/default.aspx/text.asp?2014/62/12/1152/149137

World Health Organization (WHO) estimates that nearly 285 million people in the world are visually impaired. Of these, 39 million are estimated to be blind. About 80% of this visual impairment are avoidable. [1] Visual impairment due to infectious diseases has declined but longer life expectancy has resulted in an increase in the number of people becoming visually impaired due to age-related disease.

In India, blindness has been recognized as an important public health problem. [2] Uncorrected refractive error is estimated to be the major cause of low vision and the second most prevalent cause of blindness. [3] Some of the ocular diseases if not detected and treated early could lead to permanent vision loss.

Measurement of visual acuity is usually the first step in the evaluation of the visual system. Hence, visual acuity is also used as the first filter in any vision screening program. A cut off of <6/9 in either eye is used to define abnormal vision in India. Children failing this test are referred for further evaluation. [4] Many charts using different types of targets or optotypes are available for measuring visual acuity. [5] However, charts of these types would be too time-consuming to be of much use in large scale vision screening programs, where more number of people are required to be screened in a given time. We have designed a compact chart for screening general population incorporating logMAR chart design principles. This chart, which we named the "Pocket Vision Screener," aids in quick and accurate screening for visual acuity deficits.


  Materials and Methods Top


The study was done by following the tenets of declaration of Helsinki and as per the protocol of Vision research foundation.

Selection of letters and construction of the chart

Modern chart construction uses the principles of geometric progression of letter sizes, usage of letters of equal legibility, and normalization of crowding. [6] The 10 Sloan letters [C, D, H, V, R, N, S, O, K, and Z] are known to have equal legibility. They are also considered to be equivalent to the gold standard Landolt C optotype. [7] The Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) charts were constructed using these ten Sloan letters and logMAR construction design. [8]

The Pocket Vision Screener reported in this study was also constructed using the Sloan letters. The screener contains three lines with seven letters in each line. The task for the subject would be to read the middle five letters in the middle line [Figure 1]. The central five letters in each line were created using the letters in the 6/9 line of the ETDRS charts. The remaining two letters were randomly chosen from the Sloan letters. Multiple combinations of these seven letter sequences were generated. From these, only those combinations that differed in their row legibility values by at most 1% were used for the construction of the chart. Row legibility values were calculated by adding up the legibility scores of the individual letters in that line. These calculations were done using the difficulty scores given by Sloan. [7]
Figure 1: A version of the Pocket Vision Screener. The subject's task is to read the letter NCVOZ from a distance of 3 m. The box is included in this picture for clarity; it does not appear in the Pocket Vision Screener

Click here to view


Six versions of the screener were constructed. Two of these had the middle line with letters chosen from the ETDRS chart 1, two with letters chosen from ETDRS chart 2 and two from ETDRS chart R. The two charts with the same middle line had their first and third lines interchanged [Figure 2].
Figure 2: The six versions of the Pocket Vision Screener. Each row has the same middle line. In each row, the left and right screeners have their first and the third lines interchanged

Click here to view


Each of the 10 Sloan letters were constructed separately on a 5 × 5 grid using the image processing software Adobe Photoshop 7.0 (Adobe Systems, Inc, California, USA). The size of the letters was calculated to be 6.92 mm × 6.92 mm for viewing at 3 m distance corresponding to a logMAR visual acuity of 0.2 (or approximately 6/9 Snellen acuity). The letters were arranged using the software CorelDraw 10 (Corel Corporation, Ontario, Canada). The spacing between the rows and the spacing between adjacent letters in a row were set equal to 6.92 mm (the letter size). The letters were printed as black letters on a white background. The white background was extended to one letter size on all the four sides; beyond this the screener was completely black. The overall size of the screener was 12 cm (width) ×6.2 cm (height). It is an externally illuminated chart intended to be used in a standard illumination of 130-215 lux. The screeners were printed on a 250 gsm, matt finished paper using a laser printer with the cost of production INR 10.

Effectiveness of the Pocket Vision Screener

Subjects were recruited from the Outpatient Department of the Rural Eye Hospital, Sankara Nethralaya, Chennai. One hundred consecutive patients who could read English alphabets and who had unaided visual acuity better than or equal to 6/60 so as to exclude people with severe visual impairment. Consecutive patients visiting the optometrist room, which was standardized for testing and who met the required criteria were included in the study. After obtaining oral consent from the subjects, unaided visual acuity was tested by a trained optometrist using both the newly constructed Pocket Vision Screener and logMAR visual acuity chart. All visual acuity testing was performed by a single examiner. For each subject, right eye was chosen as the testing eye and the other eye was occluded. The chart to be read first was chosen randomly. The randomization was done using the pseudo-random number generator in Microsoft Excel. Subjects were seated at a distance of 3 m from the chart. In the case of visual acuity measurement using the logMAR chart, the subjects were instructed to read from the top left and stop reading until they were not able to read anymore letters. Every correctly read letter was assigned a score of 0.02 and every incorrectly read or unread letter was assigned a score of 0.00. Visual acuity (logMAR) for each subject was determined using the formula:

VA (logMAR) =1.1-0.02 × number of correctly read letters

In the case of the Pocket Vision Screener, the subjects were instructed to read all the letters in the middle line. Correct response of any three letters out of the middle five in the middle line was considered to have passed the screening as more than 50% of the letters were rightly identified. The time taken to measure visual acuity was recorded using a stopwatch for both the logMAR chart and Pocket Vision Screener.

Data analysis was done using  Microsoft Office Excel 2003 (Microsoft) and SPSS version 12.0 (SPSS Inc.).


  Results Top


There were 100 subjects of whom 57 were male. The age of the subjects ranged from 7 to 71 years (43 ± 17 years). We tested the ability of the Pocket Vision Screener to correctly identify visual acuity deficits. Anyone who could not read correctly three letters of the middle five in the middle line were considered to have a visual acuity deficit. Similarly, for the logMAR chart, anyone who had a visual acuity logMAR value >0.24 was considered to a visual acuity deficit. Subjects were classified as normal or deficient based on the logMAR visual acuity measurement. Constructing the 2 × 2 truth table [Table 1], the sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and likelihood ratios of the Pocket Vision Screener in correctly classifying the subjects were calculated [Table 2]. The sensitivity and specificity were found to be 81% and 94%, respectively. The positive and negative predictive values were found to be 91% and 87%, respectively.
Table 1: Truth table for the measurement made with the Pocket Vision Screener

Click here to view
Table 2: Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value, positive and negative likelihood ratio for the Pocket Vision Screener in correctly classifying subjects

Click here to view


The time taken by both the methods was compared using Wilcoxon signed rank test as recorded times did not fall under a normal distribution. There was a significant difference (P < 0.001) in the time taken to measure visual acuity comparing charts, with the Pocket Vision Screener taking less time [Table 3].
Table 3: Time taken for the logMAR chart and the Pocket Vision Screener

Click here to view



  Discussion Top


Screening is defined as "The systematic application of a test or inquiry, to identify individuals at sufficient risk of a specific disorder to warrant further investigation or direct preventive action, among persons who have not sought medical attention on account of symptoms of that disorder." [9] A screening test is said to be valid depending on the frequency with which the result of the test is confirmed by a gold-standard diagnostic procedure. An ideal test should have the ability to classify persons with disease as positives (sensitivity) and those without the disease as negatives (specificity). [10] Sensitivity and specificity can be varied reciprocally, according to the setting, that is, the cut-off value used for further referral. Above 90% of specificity are usually used in school vision screening programs in view of the cost involved in confirmatory examinations. [10] The Pocket Vision Screener meets these qualities as it is efficient in detecting those with visual acuity worse than 6/9 (sensitivity) and ruling out those who do not have defective visual acuity (specificity). It is highly acceptable and subject-friendly, as it can be administered with ease, and consumes less time.

Population-based studies from India show that among children in the age group of 7-15 years, the prevalence of uncorrected visual acuity of 6/12 or worse in the better eye is 6.4% in the urban population and 2.7% in the rural population, and the prevalence of best-corrected visual acuity worse than 6/12 among the same population was 0.81% and 0.78%, respectively. [10],[11] Refractive errors were the leading cause of visual impairment in 61% of eyes in rural population and 81.7% of eyes in urban population with amblyopia being the second major cause in both populations. [11],[12] As estimated by Naidoo et al., 5% of the school children between 6 and 20 years had refractive error. [13] When provided with appropriate refractive services and spectacles, 70% of all children in the rural areas who had baseline visual acuity worse than 6/12 and 80% of children from urban population were found to benefit. [11],[12] Dandona and Dandona 2006 estimated that the total number of persons with visual impairment worldwide, including that due to uncorrected refractive error was 259 million, 61% higher than the WHO estimate. [14]

The current ophthalmologist to population ratio in India is estimated to be nearly 1:100,000. [15] 115,000 4-year trained optometrists are required to meet the demand of providing comprehensive care to all the people in the country. [16] There is a huge burden of providing eye care services in India, as the number of eye care providers is insufficient for the population. Novel initiatives such as training teachers to screen school children have shown to reduce the workload of eye care specialists. However, the false positive rates were found high among those referred by teachers. [17],[18] Considering the simplicity of instructions and less time required for administration, the model of training teachers and other volunteers could be tried in future.

Low cost of production, compact size, ease of use, and the less screening time makes this screener an ideal tool for mass vision screening.


  Conclusion Top


The Pocket Vision Screener is highly sensitive and specific and has a good positive and negative predictive value. Therefore, this can be used as quick and accurate tool to screen subjects with visual acuity worse than 6/9. The Pocket Vision Screener is a compact and simple tool to use in addition to being very cost effective.


  Acknowledgment Top


Mr. N. R. Raj Kumar, Ms. P. Sakunthala.

 
  References Top

1.
Visual Impairment and Blindness. World Health Organisation, Fact Sheet No. 282. Available from: http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs282/en/. [Last updated on August 2014; Last cited on 2014 Feb 10].  Back to cited text no. 1
    
2.
Murthy GV, Gupta SK, Bachani D, Jose R, John N. Current estimates of blindness in India. Br J Ophthalmol 2005;89:257-60.  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.
Resnikoff S, Pascolini D, Mariotti SP, Pokharel GP. Global magnitude of visual impairment caused by uncorrected refractive errors in 2004. Bull World Health Organ 2008;86:63-70.  Back to cited text no. 3
    
4.
Murthy GV. Vision testing for refractive errors in schools: ′Screening′ programmes in schools. Community Eye Health 2000;13:3-5.  Back to cited text no. 4
    
5.
Bailey IL. Visual Acuity. In: Benjamin WJ, editor. Borish′s Clinical Refraction. 2 nd ed. Missouri: Butterworth Heinemann Elsevier; 2006. p. 229.  Back to cited text no. 5
    
6.
Bailey IL, Lovie JE. New design principles for visual acuity letter charts. Am J Optom Physiol Opt 1976;53:740-5.  Back to cited text no. 6
    
7.
Sloan LL. New test charts for the measurement of visual acuity at far and near distances. Am J Ophthalmol 1959;48:807-13.  Back to cited text no. 7
    
8.
Ferris FL 3 rd , Kassoff A, Bresnick GH, Bailey I. New visual acuity charts for clinical research. Am J Ophthalmol 1982;94:91-6.  Back to cited text no. 8
    
9.
Gray M, Troop P. National Screening Committee, Health Departments of the United Kingdom; April, 1998.  Back to cited text no. 9
    
10.
Wilson JM, Jungner G. Principles and Practice of Screening for Disease. World Health Organization. Public Health Papers, No 34. Geneva: World Health Organization; 1968.  Back to cited text no. 10
    
11.
Murthy GV, Gupta SK, Ellwein LB, Muñoz SR, Pokharel GP, Sanga L, et al. Refractive error in children in an urban population in New Delhi. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2002;43:623-31.  Back to cited text no. 11
    
12.
Dandona R, Dandona L, Srinivas M, Sahare P, Narsaiah S, Muñoz SR, et al. Refractive error in children in a rural population in India. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2002;43:615-22.  Back to cited text no. 12
    
13.
Naidoo K, Ravilla D. Delivering refractive error services: Primary eye care centres and outreach. Community Eye Health 2007;20:42-4.  Back to cited text no. 13
    
14.
Dandona L, Dandona R. What is the global burden of visual impairment? BMC Med 2006;4:6.  Back to cited text no. 14
    
15.
Thomas R, Paul P, Rao GN, Muliyil JP, Mathai A. Present status of eye care in India. Surv Ophthalmol 2005;50:85-101.  Back to cited text no. 15
    
16.
De Souza N, Cui Y, Looi S, Paudel P, Shinde L, Kumar K, et al. The role of optometrists in India: An integral part of an eye health team. Indian J Ophthalmol 2012;60:401-5.  Back to cited text no. 16
    
17.
Nirmalan PK, Katz J, Robin AL, Krishnadas R, Ramakrishnan R, Thulasiraj RD, et al. Utilisation of eye care services in rural south India: The Aravind comprehensive eye survey. Br J Ophthalmol 2004;88:1237-41.  Back to cited text no. 17
    
18.
Sudhan A, Nirmalan PK, Katz J, Robin AL, Krishnadas R, Ramakrishnan R, et al. Effectiveness of using teachers to screen eyes of school going children in Satna district of Madhya Pradesh, India. Indian J Ophthalmol 2009;57:455-58.  Back to cited text no. 18
[PUBMED]  Medknow Journal  


    Figures

  [Figure 1], [Figure 2]
 
 
    Tables

  [Table 1], [Table 2], [Table 3]


This article has been cited by
1 Discrimination of paediatric acuity test optotypes by 6-year-old children
Jameel Rizwana Hussaindeen, Bhavatharini Ramakrishnan, Aishwarya Ravi, Monisha SundarRaj, Archayeeta Rakshit, Robert M. Nosofsky, T. Rowan Candy
Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics. 2023;
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
2 Validity and Reliability of Vis-Screen Application: A Smartphone-Based Distance Vision Testing for Visual Impairment and Blindness Vision Screening
Siti Nor Aishah Abdul Rahman, Nyi Nyi Naing, Abdul Mutalib Othman, Zarina Mohamad, Tg Mohd Masrul Ibrahim, Syaratul Emma Hashim, Atif Amin Baig, Ling Shing Wong, Hemaniswarri Dewi Dewadas, Siddharthan Selvaraj
Medicina. 2023; 59(5): 912
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
3 Steep increase in myopia among public school-going children in South India after COVID-19 home confinement
Krishnamurthy Saara, Saravanan Swetha, Rangavittal Subhiksha, Murali Amirthaa, Narayanan Anuradha
Indian Journal of Ophthalmology. 2022; 70(8): 3040
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
4 Eye care seeking behavior among rural adults in South India: Tamil Nadu Rural Eye Examination (TREE) Study Report 1
Subhiksha Rangavittal, Anuradha Narayanan
Indian Journal of Ophthalmology. 2022; 70(9): 3255
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
5 Results of the School Children Ocular Biometry and Refractive Error Study in South India
Aparna Gopalakrishnan, Jameel Rizwana Hussaindeen, Romans Chaudhary, Bhavatharini Ramakrishnan, Sushil Arunachalam, Akshaya C Balakrishnan, Deepika Sri J S, Manaswini Sahoo, Robin S, Varsaharinya M, Vishnupriya S, Anuradha Narayanan
Turkish Journal of Ophthalmology. 2022; 52(6): 412
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
6 Prevalence of refractive errors among school-going children in a multistate study in India
Elizabeth Joseph, Meena CK, Rahul Kumar, Mary Sebastian, Catherine M Suttle, Nathan Congdon, Sheeladevi Sethu, Gudlavalleti VS Murthy
British Journal of Ophthalmology. 2022; : bjo-2022-3
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
7 Design and delivery of the Refractive Errors Among Children (REACH) school-based eye health programme in India
Asim Sil, Prachi Aggarwal, Subhra Sil, Ankita Mitra, Elesh Jain, Sethu Sheeladevi, GVS Murthy
Clinical and Experimental Optometry. 2022; : 1
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
8 Distribution of Astigmatism among School Children Who Fail Vision Screening in South India
Saara Krishnamurthy, Subhiksha Rangavittal, Ambika Chandrasekar, Anuradha Narayanan
Ophthalmic Epidemiology. 2022; : 1
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
9 Vision Impairment among Children in South India: Results from a Large-Scale School Eye Screening
Subhiksha Rangavittal, Sruthi Sree Krishnamurthy, Ambika Chandrasekar, Anuradha Narayanan
Ophthalmic Epidemiology. 2022; : 1
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
10 Prevalence of myopia among urban and suburban school children in Tamil Nadu, South India: findings from the Sankara Nethralaya Tamil Nadu Essilor Myopia (STEM) Study
Aparna Gopalakrishnan, Jameel Rizwana Hussaindeen, Viswanathan Sivaraman, Meenakshi Swaminathan, Yee Ling Wong, James A Armitage, Alex Gentle, Simon Backhouse
Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics. 2022;
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
11 Status of Eye Health among School Children in South India – Sankara Nethralaya School Children Eye Examination Study (SN-SEES)
Anuradha Narayanan, Sruthi Sree Krishnamurthy, Krishna Kumar R
Ophthalmic Epidemiology. 2021; 28(4): 349
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
12 Patterns of cognitive-motor dual-task interference post stroke: an observational inpatient study at hospital discharge
Jody A. FELD, Prudence PLUMMER
European Journal of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine. 2021; 57(3)
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
13 The Sankara Nethralaya Tamil Nadu Essilor Myopia (STEM) Study—Defining a Threshold for Non-Cycloplegic Myopia Prevalence in Children
Aparna Gopalakrishnan, Jameel Rizwana Hussaindeen, Viswanathan Sivaraman, Meenakshi Swaminathan, Yee Ling Wong, James Andrew Armitage, Alex Gentle, Simon Backhouse
Journal of Clinical Medicine. 2021; 10(6): 1215
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
14 Status of eye health among tribal school children in South India
Anuradha Narayanan, SruthiSree Krishnamurthy, Karthika Pandurangan, Bhavatharini Ramakrishnan, Hemamalini Ramajayam, RKrishna Kumar
Indian Journal of Ophthalmology. 2021; 69(3): 543
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
15 Commentary: A novel miniaturized visual acuity chart design
JameelRizwana Hussaindeen
Indian Journal of Ophthalmology. 2021; 69(1): 51
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
16 Saving space: Comparing mini - logMAR with standard logMAR visual acuity
Farnaz Kauser, AbadanK Amitava, Juhi Saxena, SAisha Raza, Anam Masood, MdShahid Alam
Indian Journal of Ophthalmology. 2021; 69(1): 48
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
17 Prevalence of color vision deficiency among school-going boys in South India
SruthiSree Krishnamurthy, Subhiksha Rangavittal, Ambika Chandrasekar, Anuradha Narayanan
Indian Journal of Ophthalmology. 2021; 69(8): 2021
[Pubmed] | [DOI]



 

Top
 
 
  Search
 
    Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
    Access Statistics
    Email Alert *
    Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)  

 
  In this article
Abstract
Materials and Me...
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Acknowledgment
References
Article Figures
Article Tables

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed3790    
    Printed68    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded339    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 17    

Recommend this journal