Universal screening does not reduce the prevalence of visual impairment in older people

Robert W Enzenauer MD, MPH (Commentary Author)
{"title":"Universal screening does not reduce the prevalence of visual impairment in older people","authors":"Robert W Enzenauer MD, MPH (Commentary Author)","doi":"10.1016/j.ehbc.2004.03.009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Question</h3><p>Does targeted or universal screening for visual acuity improve visual outcomes in older people?</p></div><div><h3>Study design</h3><p>Cluster randomised controlled trial.</p></div><div><h3>Main results</h3><p>There was no significant difference in the proportion of people with poor visual acuity with universal screening compared with targeted screening at follow-up (median follow-up 3.9 years; absolute risk for acuity &lt;6/18 in either eye: 37.0% (339/978) with universal screening vs. 34.7% (307/829) with targeted screening; RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.36; <em>P</em>=0.58). There was no significant difference in visual function between groups at follow up (mean composite NEI score: 86.0 with universal screening vs. 85.6 with targeted screening; mean difference: 0.4, 95% CI –1.7 to 2.5; <em>P</em>=0.69).</p></div><div><h3>Authors’ conclusions</h3><p>Universal screening for visual impairment in older people as part of multidimensional screening programme did not significantly decrease the overall prevalence of visual impairment.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":100512,"journal":{"name":"Evidence-based Healthcare","volume":"8 3","pages":"Pages 150-152"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2004-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.ehbc.2004.03.009","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Evidence-based Healthcare","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1462941004000440","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Question

Does targeted or universal screening for visual acuity improve visual outcomes in older people?

Study design

Cluster randomised controlled trial.

Main results

There was no significant difference in the proportion of people with poor visual acuity with universal screening compared with targeted screening at follow-up (median follow-up 3.9 years; absolute risk for acuity <6/18 in either eye: 37.0% (339/978) with universal screening vs. 34.7% (307/829) with targeted screening; RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.36; P=0.58). There was no significant difference in visual function between groups at follow up (mean composite NEI score: 86.0 with universal screening vs. 85.6 with targeted screening; mean difference: 0.4, 95% CI –1.7 to 2.5; P=0.69).

Authors’ conclusions

Universal screening for visual impairment in older people as part of multidimensional screening programme did not significantly decrease the overall prevalence of visual impairment.

普遍筛查并不能降低老年人视力损害的患病率
问题有针对性或普遍性的视力筛查是否能改善老年人的视力?研究设计聚类随机对照试验。主要结果:与随访时的靶向筛查相比,接受普适筛查的视力较差的人的比例没有显著差异(中位随访3.9年;双眼视力<6/18的绝对风险:普适筛查为37.0%(339/978),而靶向筛查为34.7%(307/829);RR 1.07,95%CI 0.84至1.36;P=0.58)。随访时,两组之间的视觉功能没有显著差异(平均综合NEI评分:通用筛查为86.0分,目标筛查为85.6分;平均差异:0.4,95%CI–1.7至2.5;P=0.69)视觉障碍的总体患病率。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信