Pacific Northwest Evidence-based Practice Center, Department of Medicine, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon2Department of Medical Informatics and Clinical Epidemiology, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon.
Pacific Northwest Evidence-based Practice Center, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon.
JAMA. 2016 Mar 1;315(9):915-33. doi: 10.1001/jama.2016.0783.
Impaired visual acuity is common among older adults and can adversely affect function and quality of life.
To update a 2009 systematic review on screening for impaired visual acuity among older adults for the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF).
Ovid MEDLINE (2008 to January 2016), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews.
Randomized clinical trials of screening; diagnostic accuracy studies of screening tests in primary care settings; and randomized clinical trials of treatment vs placebo or no treatment for uncorrected refractive errors, cataracts, and dry (atrophic) or wet (exudative) age-related macular degeneration (AMD). Studies of screening and diagnostic accuracy were limited to asymptomatic adults 65 years or older; studies of treatment included asymptomatic adults of any age.
One investigator abstracted data, a second checked data for accuracy, and 2 investigators independently assessed study quality using predefined criteria. Random-effects meta-analysis was used to estimate the relative and absolute benefits of vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors (anti-VEGF) for wet AMD.
Visual acuity, vision-related function, functional capacity, harms, and diagnostic accuracy.
Three trials (n = 4728) from the 2009 USPSTF review found that screening for impaired visual acuity was not associated with improved visual or clinical outcomes. In 1 good-quality trial (n = 3346), universal screening identified 27% of persons with impaired visual acuity and correctable impairment vs 3.1% with targeted screening, but there was no difference in the likelihood of visual acuity worse than 20/60 after 3 to 5 years (37% vs 35%; relative risk [RR], 1.07; 95% CI, 0.84-1.36). The 2009 review found that effective treatments are available for uncorrected refractive errors and cataracts. Ten-year trial results of dry AMD found an antioxidant/zinc combination was associated with decreased risk of visual acuity loss (46% vs 54%; odds ratio, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.57-0.88). An updated meta-analysis found anti-VEGF for wet AMD was associated with greater likelihood of having vision 20/200 or better vs sham injection (4 trials; RR, 1.47; 95% CI, 1.30-1.66; I2 = 42%; absolute risk difference, 24%; 95% CI, 12%-37% after 1 year). New evidence on the diagnostic accuracy of visual acuity screening tests was limited and consistent with previous findings that screening questions or a visual acuity test was associated with suboptimal accuracy.
Screening can identify persons with impaired visual acuity, and effective treatments are available for common causes of impaired visual acuity, such as uncorrected refractive error, cataracts, and dry or wet AMD. However, direct evidence found no significant difference between vision screening in older adults in primary care settings vs no screening for improving visual acuity or other clinical outcomes.
视力障碍在老年人中很常见,会对功能和生活质量产生不利影响。
为美国预防服务工作组(USPSTF)更新 2009 年关于老年人视力障碍筛查的系统评价。
Ovid MEDLINE(2008 年至 2016 年 1 月)、Cochrane 对照试验中心注册库和 Cochrane 系统评价数据库。
针对未经矫正的屈光不正、白内障和干性(萎缩性)或湿性(渗出性)年龄相关性黄斑变性(AMD)的筛查随机临床试验;初级保健环境中筛查试验的诊断准确性研究;以及未经矫正的屈光不正、白内障和干性(萎缩性)或湿性(渗出性)年龄相关性黄斑变性(AMD)的治疗与安慰剂或不治疗的随机临床试验。筛查和诊断准确性研究仅限于无症状 65 岁或以上的成年人;治疗研究包括任何年龄的无症状成年人。
一名调查员提取数据,第二名调查员检查数据的准确性,两名调查员使用预定标准独立评估研究质量。使用随机效应荟萃分析估计血管内皮生长因子抑制剂(抗 VEGF)治疗湿性 AMD 的相对和绝对益处。
视力、与视力相关的功能、功能能力、危害和诊断准确性。
2009 年 USPSTF 审查中的三项试验(n=4728)发现,筛查视力障碍与改善视力或临床结果无关。在一项高质量试验(n=3346)中,普遍筛查发现 27%的视力障碍者和可矫正障碍者,而目标筛查者为 3.1%,但 3 至 5 年后视力低于 20/60 的可能性无差异(37%对 35%;相对风险 [RR],1.07;95%CI,0.84-1.36)。2009 年的审查发现,对于未经矫正的屈光不正和白内障,都有有效的治疗方法。干性 AMD 的十年试验结果发现,抗氧化剂/锌联合治疗与视力丧失风险降低相关(46%对 54%;比值比,0.71;95%CI,0.57-0.88)。更新的荟萃分析发现,湿性 AMD 的抗 VEGF 治疗与更好的视力 20/200 或更佳的可能性相关(4 项试验;RR,1.47;95%CI,1.30-1.66;I2=42%;绝对风险差异,24%;95%CI,12%-37%,持续 1 年)。视力筛查测试诊断准确性的新证据有限,与之前的研究结果一致,即筛查问题或视力测试与不太理想的准确性相关。
筛查可以识别视力障碍者,对于未经矫正的屈光不正、白内障和干性或湿性 AMD 等常见视力障碍原因,都有有效的治疗方法。然而,直接证据并未发现初级保健环境中老年人视力筛查与改善视力或其他临床结果之间存在显著差异。