MEDICAL AND SOCIAL VALUE OF AMETROPIA CORRECTION IN CHILDREN
https://doi.org/10.18008/1816-5095-2015-2-83-87
Abstract
Aim. To analyze the impact of early ametropia detection on clinical and economic treatment aspects. Patients and methods. Retrospectively, quality of ophthalmological care in 60 children aged 6-8 with ametropia and strabismus was analyzed. All children were divided into three groups depending on age, refractive error and year at which treatment was initiated. In group 1 (30 children), refractive error and strabismus were diagnosed at the first year of life. In group 2 (18 children), refractive error and strabismus were diagnosed at the age of 1-3 years. In group 3 (12 children), glasses were prescribed at the age of 3-7 years. Retrospective analysis of primary medical records of enrolled patients was performed. All diagnostic and treatment methods that were applied as well as treatment results performed at the age of 6-8 were considered. The study of economic aspects considered the rates of ophthalmological examinations and pleoptic and orthoptic treatment courses as well as need in surgery. Direct medical costs were calculated for mediumterm prospects (3-5 years). Results. Early detection of refractive errors prevents amblyopia, binocular vision impairment, and strabismus. Uncorrected refractive errors in children are characterized by high economic and social burden (i.e., the higher is the age at which refractive error was revealed, the higher treatment costs are). Ametropia diagnosis in children requires special skills, hence, dilated eye exam must be performed by pediatric ophthalmologist but not by an orthoptist. Early diagnosis of refractive errors and strabismus provides accurate glass correction and timely therapy thus reducing treatment costs. Conclusions. In terms of clinical and economic efficacy, optimal age of refractive error detection is less than 1 year. Increase in diagnostic costs is compensated by good clinical outcomes and decrease in costs of managing complications and non-medical costs associated with reduced quality of life of patients and their families.
About the Authors
E. Yu. Markova
Peoples Friendship University of Russia
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Contact information : Markova Elena Yur’evna, markova_ej@mail.ru
O. V. Kurganova
Children’s Medical Center of the Presidential Administration of Russian Federation, Moscow
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
L. Yu. Bezmel’nitsyna
N.A. Semashko Research Institute of Public Health, Moscow
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
D. O. Meshkov
N.A. Semashko Research Institute of Public Health, Moscow
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
L. V. Venediktova
Pediatric Polyclinic № 12, Branch № 1, Moscow
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
References
1. Chicherin L. P. [Main problems of children’s and adolescent’s health protection]. Vedushchie problemy okhrany zdorov’ya detey i podrostkov. [Bulletin of the National Scientific Research Institute of Public Health of Russian Academy of Medical Sciences]. Byulleten’ Natsional’nogo NII Obshchestvennogo Zdorov’ya RAMN. 2011; 2: 17-20. (in Russ.).
2. Baranov A. A., Al’bitskiy V. Yu., Terletskaya R. N. [Conception of the reduction of health preliminary losses]. Kontseptsiya sokrashcheniya predvaritel’nykh poter’ zdorov’ya. [Problems of Current Pediatrics]. Voprosy sovremennoy pediatrii. 2010; 9 (5): 5-10. (in Russ.).
3. Markova E. Yu., Sidorenko E. E. [Surgical treatment of anisometrias due to hyperopia in children]. Khirurgicheskoe lechenie anizometropiy, obuslovlennykh gipermetropiey u detey. Rossiyskaya pediatricheskaya oftal’mologiya. 2009; 4: 35-37. (in Russ.).
4. Neroev V. V. [Organization of ophthalmological service in Russian Federation]. Organizatsiya oftal’mologicheskoy pomoshchi naseleniyu Rossiyskoy Federatsii. [Annals of Ophthalmology]. Vestnik oftal’mologii. 2014; 30 (6): 8-12. (in Russ.).
5. Vlasov V. V. [Medicine in limited budget]. Meditsina v usloviyakh ogranichennogo byudzheta. Moscow, Triumf, 2000. (in Russ.).
6. Khabriev R. U., Yagudina R. I., Pravdyuk N. G. [Assessment of public health technologies]. Otsenka tekhnologiy zdravookhraneniya. Moscow, MIA, 2013. (in Russ.).
7. Vorobyev Р., Bezmelnitsyna L., Holownia М. The organization of the health care system in the Russian Federation. J. Health Policy Outcomes Res. 2012; 2: 6-10.
8. Baltussen R., Naus J., Limburg H. Cost-effectiveness of screening and correcting refractive errors in school children in Africa, Asia, America and Europe. Health Policy. 2009; 89 (2): 201-215.
9. Traboulsi E. I., Cimino H., Mash C., Wilson R., Crowe S., Lewis H. Vision First, a program to detect and treat eye diseases in young children: the first four years. Trans. Am. Ophthalmol. Soc. 2008; 106: 179-185.
10. Kvarnström G., Jakobsson P, Lennerstrand G. Visual screening of Swedish children: an ophthalmological evaluation. Acta Ophthalmol. Scand. 2001; 79 (3): 240-244.
11. Snowdon S. K., Stewart-Brown S. L. Preschool vision screening. Health Technol. Assess. 1997; 1: 1-83.
12. Pediatric Eye Disease Investigator Group. A randomized trial of patching regimens for treatment of moderate amblyopia in children. Arch. Ophthalmol 2003; 121: 603-611.
13. Cordonnier M. Screening for refractive errors in children. Compr. Ophthalmol. Update. 2006; 7 (2): 63-75.
14. Upton P., Lawford J., Eiser C. Parent-child agreement across child health-related quality of life instruments: A review of the literature. Qual. Life Res. 2008; 17: 895-913.
15. König H. H., Barry J. C., Leidl R., Zrenner E. Cost-effectiveness of orthoptic screening in kindergarten: a decision-analytic model. Strabismus. 2000; 8 (2): 79-90.
16. Käsmann-Kellner B., Heine M., Pfau B., Singer A., Ruprecht K. W. [Screening for amblyopia, strabismus and refractive abnormalities in 1,030 kindergarten children]. Klin. Monbl. Augenheilkd. 1998; 213 (3): 166-173.
17. Thorburn R., Roland M. The effectiveness of preschool vision screening by health visitors. Br. J. Community Nurs. 2000; 5 (1): 41‑44. 18. Frick K. D., Riva-Clement L., Shankar M. B. Screening for refractive error and fitting with spectacles in rural and urban India: cost-effectiveness. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 2009; 16 (6): 378-387.
18. Teerawattananon K., Wongkittirux K., Chinkulkitnivat B., Orprayoon S., Kusakul S., Tengtrisorn S., Jenchitr W. Assessing the accuracy and feasibility of a refractive error screening program conducted by school teachers in pre-primary and primary schools in Thailand. PLOS One. 2014; doi: 10.1371 / journal. pone.0096684.
19. Ganekal S., Jhanji V, Liang Y, Dorairaj S. Prevalence and etiology of amblyopia in Southern India: results from screening of school children aged 5‑15 years. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 2013; 20 (4): 228-231.
20. Kovalevskiy E. I. [Practice in pediatric ophthalmology: Handbook]. Rukovodstvo k prakticheskim zanyatiyam po detskoy oftal’mologii. Moscow, Meditsina, 1973. (in Russ.).
21. Nikiforov A. S., Guseva M. R. [Ophthalmoneurology]. Oftal’monevrologiya. Moscow, GEOTAR-Media, 2014. (in Russ.).
Review
For citations:
Markova E.Yu., Kurganova O.V., Bezmel’nitsyna L.Yu., Meshkov D.O., Venediktova L.V. MEDICAL AND SOCIAL VALUE OF AMETROPIA CORRECTION IN CHILDREN. Ophthalmology in Russia. 2015;12(2):83-87. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.18008/1816-5095-2015-2-83-87
Views:
1420
Email this article 