Beauchamp George R, Ellepola Chalani, Beauchamp Cynthia L
Center for Adult Strabismus, Dallas, Texas, USA.
Am Orthopt J. 2010;60:23-7. doi: 10.3368/aoj.60.1.23.
To review the literature for evidence-based medicine (EBM), to assess the evidence for effectiveness of vision screening, and to propose moving toward value-based medicine (VBM) as a preferred basis for comparative effectiveness research.
Literature based evidence is applied to five core questions concerning vision screening: (1) Is vision valuable (an inherent good)?; (2) Is screening effective (finding amblyopia)?; (3) What are the costs of screening?; (4) Is treatment effective?; and (5) Is amblyopia detection beneficial?
Based on EBM literature and clinical experience, the answers to the five questions are: (1) yes; (2) based on literature, not definitively so; (3) relatively inexpensive, although some claim benefits for more expensive options such as mandatory exams; (4) yes, for compliant care, although treatment processes may have negative aspects such as "bullying"; and (5) economic productive values are likely very high, with returns of investment on the order of 10:1, while human value returns need further elucidation.
Additional evidence is required to ascertain the degree to which vision screening is effective. The processes of screening are multiple, sequential, and complicated. The disease is complex, and good visual outcomes require compliance. The value of outcomes is appropriately analyzed in clinical, human, and economic terms.
回顾循证医学(EBM)文献,评估视力筛查有效性的证据,并提议转向基于价值的医学(VBM),将其作为比较效果研究的首选基础。
基于文献的证据应用于关于视力筛查的五个核心问题:(1)视力有价值吗(一种内在的益处)?;(2)筛查有效吗(发现弱视)?;(3)筛查的成本是多少?;(4)治疗有效吗?;以及(5)弱视检测有益吗?
基于循证医学文献和临床经验,这五个问题的答案是:(1)是;(2)基于文献,并非绝对如此;(3)相对便宜,尽管有人声称诸如强制检查等更昂贵的选择有好处;(4)是,对于依从性治疗而言,尽管治疗过程可能有诸如“恐吓”等负面因素;以及(5)经济生产价值可能非常高,投资回报率约为10:1,而人文价值回报需要进一步阐明。
需要更多证据来确定视力筛查有效的程度。筛查过程是多重、连续且复杂的。疾病很复杂,良好的视力结果需要依从性。结果的价值应从临床、人文和经济角度进行适当分析。