Livingstone Iain, Butler Laura, Misanjo Esther, Lok Alan, Middleton Duncan, Wilson Janice Waterson, Delfin Silvija, Kayange Petros, Hamilton Ruth
Falkirk Community Hospital, NHS Forth Valley, Falkirk, UK.
Glasgow Centre for Ophthalmic Research, NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde, Glasgow, UK.
Transl Vis Sci Technol. 2018 Jan 9;8(1):8. doi: 10.1167/tvst.8.1.8. eCollection 2019 Jan.
To evaluate two builds of the digital grating acuity test, "Peekaboo Vision" (PV), in young (6-60 months) populations in two hospital settings (Malawi and United Kingdom).
Study 1 evaluated PV in Blantyre, Malawi ( = 58, mean age 33 months); study 2 evaluated an updated build in Glasgow, United Kingdom ( = 60, mean age 44 months). Acuities were tested-retested with PV and Keeler Acuity Cards for Infants (KACI). Bland-Altman techniques were used to compare results and repeatability. Child engagement was compared between groups. Study 2 included test-time comparison.
Study 1 (Malawi): The mean difference between PV and KACI was 0.02 logMAR with 95% limits of agreement (LoA) of 0.33 to 0.37 LogMAR. On test-retest, PV demonstrated 95% LoA of -0.283 to 0.198 logMAR with coefficient of repeatability (CR) 0.27. KACI demonstrated 95% LoA of -0.427 to 0.323 logMAR, and larger CR was 0.37. PV evidenced higher engagement scores than KACI ( = 0.0005). Study 2 (UK): The mean difference between PV and KACI was 0.01 logMAR; 95% LoA was -0.413 to 0.437 logMAR. Again, on test-retest, PV had narrower LoA (-0.344 to 0.320 logMAR) and lower CR (0.32) versus KACI, with LoA -0.432 to 0.407 logMAR, CR 0.42. The two tests did not differ in engagement score ( = 0.5). Test time was ∼1 minute shorter for PV (185 vs. 251 s, = 0.0021).
PV gives comparable results to KACI in two pediatric populations in two settings, with benefits in repeatability indices and test duration.
Leveraging tablet technology extends reliable infant acuity testing to bedside, home, and rural settings, including areas where traditional equipment cannot be financed.
在两个医院环境（马拉维和英国）中，评估针对6至60个月幼儿群体的两种数字光栅视力测试版本“躲猫猫视力测试”（PV）。
研究1在马拉维布兰太尔评估PV（n = 58，平均年龄33个月）；研究2在英国格拉斯哥评估更新版本（n = 60，平均年龄44个月）。使用PV和基勒婴儿视力卡（KACI）对视力进行测试 - 重测。采用布兰德 - 奥特曼技术比较结果和重复性。比较两组之间儿童的参与度。研究2包括测试时间比较。
研究1（马拉维）：PV和KACI之间的平均差异为0.02 logMAR，95%一致性界限（LoA）为0.33至0.37 LogMAR。在重测中，PV的95% LoA为 -0.283至0.198 logMAR，重复性系数（CR）为0.27。KACI的95% LoA为 -0.427至0.323 logMAR，较大的CR为0.37。PV的参与度得分高于KACI（p = 0.0005）。研究2（英国）：PV和KACI之间的平均差异为0.01 logMAR；95% LoA为 -0.413至0.437 logMAR。同样，在重测中，与KACI相比，PV的LoA更窄（-0.344至0.320 logMAR）且CR更低（0.32），KACI的LoA为 -0.432至0.407 logMAR，CR为0.42。两种测试在参与度得分上没有差异（p = 0.5）。PV的测试时间比KACI短约1分钟（185秒对251秒，p = 0.0021）。
在两个环境中的两个儿科群体中，PV与KACI的结果相当，在重复性指标和测试持续时间方面具有优势。
利用平板电脑技术将可靠的婴儿视力测试扩展到床边、家庭和农村环境，包括传统设备无法获得资金支持的地区。
