Parents’ Awareness And Perception Of Children’s Refractive Error. A Qualitative Study

@#Uncorrected refractive error is the leading cause of moderate and severe visual impairment across the globe. An important driver for early detection and management of refractive errors among children is appropriate parental awareness. This study aims to understand the awareness and perception among parents of children with refractive errors utilizing the conceptual framework of Health Belief Model. This qualitative study focused to conduct semi-structured interviews of parents who sought eye care for their children. Thirty-five parents who visited an eye care center for refractive error correction of their children between 5 to 15 years of age were purposively selected. The four constructs of the Health Belief Model (perceived susceptibility, perceived severity, perceived benefits and perceived barriers) were applied to prepare the interview guide. The voice records of participants were transcribed verbatim, coded and qualitatively analyzed to generate relevant themes. All participants were well aware of refractive errors and the implications of them on the visual and social development of children if they leave the errors untreated. However,there were varying perception about refractive error leading to serious consequences. The enanced quality of life with proper refractive correction prompted parents to seek timely eyecare for their children.

Efficacy of a remote based computerised visual acuity measurement.

AIM: To determine the efficacy of a remotely operated computer-based logarithmic (logMAR) visual acuity chart. METHODS: Visual acuity was tested using a laptop or computer-based logMAR chart (COMPlog) for all subjects by two different methods. The methods differed by the physical presence and absence (remote) of an optometrist and in the mode of instructions provided. Remote access was obtained through the internet, using Teamviewer software to control the system linked to COMPlog and instructions were provided by telephone. The order of measurements and the eye to be tested was randomised. logMAR visual acuity and time taken were recorded. A questionnaire was used to assess the participant's feedback. RESULTS: Intraclass correlation for visual acuity between the two methods (α=0.964, 95% CI 0.937 to 0.979). There was no statistically significant difference (p=0.648) in the median visual acuity measurement between the two methods (median difference 0.00, IQR 0.20 logMAR). The time taken between the two methods was not statistically significant (p=0.457). There was no significant difference in the responses to the questionnaire between the study methods (p=0.119). CONCLUSIONS: Tele (remotely controlled) visual acuity measurement is as reliable as that measured with the physical presence of an optometrist.