| Popis: |
Background/Objectives: Remote assessment of children’s visual acuity became necessary during the COVID-19 pandemic. This study aimed to assess the extent of agreement between hospital-based clinical testing and clinician-led home-based testing. Subjects/Methods: 50 children aged 2–16 (median 8) years attending hospital eye services at two UK hospitals had routine hospital-based acuities compared with subsequent online, orthoptist-supervised home visual acuities. Agreement was assessed using intra-class correlation and Bland-Altman plots, as was test-retest (TRT) agreement of two, repeated home acuity tests. Results: Monocular acuities tested at hospital and at home were obtained from all 50 children; 33 also had binocular acuities in both settings and 35 had acuities retested immediately at home. Most children were tested at home using a computer or tablet; two were tested with a smartphone. No mean test differences were found for hospital vs home testing (–0.004 (95% CI –0.06–0.05) and –0.008 (95% CI –0.04–0.03) for binocular and monocular testing, respectively). Limits of agreement (LOAs) were ±0.32 and ±0.35 logMAR for binocular and monocular testing, respectively. LOAs for inter-ocular acuity differences (hospital vs home) were –0.15–0.25 logMAR. TRT monocular acuity agreement was excellent, with an LOA of ±0.14 logMAR. Conclusions: We found good (binocular) and excellent (monocular) agreement between hospital and home acuity testing. LOAs were in keeping with multiple changes between measures (test; setting; time; tester) and a cohort including patients as young as two years old. Even smartphone testing proved feasible. Inability of the supervising orthoptist to check test distance or device calibration/orientation was a limitation, likely contributing to the breadth of LOAs. Home vision testing is feasible and accurate, but its precision, acceptability, health economic impact and carbon impact require more attention. |
