Accuracy and validity of IK4 handheld video keratometer measurements in children.

The infant keratometer (IK4) is a custom handheld instrument that was designed specifically to allow measurement of corneal astigmatism in infants as young as 6 months of age. In this study, accuracy of IK4 measurements with the use of standard toric surfaces was within 0.25 D. Validity measurements obtained in 860 children aged 3-7 years demonstrated slightly greater astigmatism measurements in the IK4 than in the Retinomax K+. Measurement success was 98% when the IK4 was used. The IK4 may prove to be clinically useful for screening children as young as 3 years of age at high risk for corneal astigmatism.

Prevalence of corneal astigmatism in Tohono O'odham Native American children 6 months to 8 years of age.

PURPOSE: To describe the prevalence of corneal astigmatism in infants and young children who are members of a Native American tribe with a high prevalence of refractive astigmatism. METHODS: The prevalence of corneal astigmatism was assessed by obtaining infant keratometer (IK4) measurements from 1235 Tohono O'odham children, aged 6 months to 8 years. RESULTS: The prevalence of corneal astigmatism >2.00 D was lower in the 1- to <2-year-old age group when compared with all other age groups, except the 6- to <7-year-old group. The magnitude of mean corneal astigmatism was significantly lower in the 1- to <2-year age group than in the 5- to <6-, 6- to <7-, and 7- to <8-year age groups. Corneal astigmatism was with-the-rule (WTR) in 91.4% of astigmatic children (≥1.00 D). CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence and mean amount of corneal astigmatism were higher than reported in non-Native American populations. Mean astigmatism increased from 1.43 D in 1-year-olds to nearly 2.00 D by school age.

Prevalence of astigmatism in Native American infants and children.

PURPOSE: To describe the prevalence of high astigmatism in infants and young children who are members of a Native American tribe with a high prevalence of astigmatism. METHODS: SureSight autorefraction measurements were obtained for 1461 Tohono O'odham children aged 6 months to 8 years. RESULTS: The prevalence of astigmatism >2.00 diopters was 30% in Tohono O'odham children during infancy (6 months to <1 year of age) and was 23 to 29% at ages 2 to 7 years. However, prevalence dipped to 14% in children 1 to <2 years of age. At all ages, axis of astigmatism was with-the-rule (plus cylinder axis 90 degrees +/- 30 degrees ) in at least 94% of cases. CONCLUSIONS: As in non-Native American populations, Tohono O'odham infants show a high prevalence of astigmatism, which decreases in the second year of life. However, the prevalence of high astigmatism in Tohono O'odham children increases by age 2 to <3 years to a level near that seen in infancy and remains at that level until at least age 8 years. Longitudinal data are needed to determine whether the increase in high astigmatism after infancy occurs in infants who had astigmatism as infants or is due to the development of high astigmatism in children who did not show astigmatism during infancy.

Amblyopia in astigmatic infants and toddlers.

PURPOSE: To determine whether reduced astigmatism-corrected acuity for vertical (V) and/or horizontal (H) gratings and/or meridional amblyopia (MA) are present before 3 years of age in children who have with-the-rule astigmatism. METHODS: Subjects were 448 children, 6 months through 2 years of age with no known ocular abnormalities other than with-the-rule astigmatism, who were recruited through Women, Infants and Children clinics on the Tohono O'odham reservation. Children were classified as non-astigmats (< or =2.00 diopters) or astigmats (>2.00 diopters) based on right eye non-cycloplegic autorefraction measurements (Welch Allyn SureSight). Right eye astigmatism-corrected grating acuity for V and H stimuli was measured using the Teller Acuity Card procedure while children wore cross-cylinder lenses to correct their astigmatism or plano lenses if they had no astigmatism. RESULTS: Astigmatism-corrected acuity for both V and H gratings was significantly poorer in the astigmats than in the non-astigmats, and the reduction in acuity for astigmats was present for children in all three age groups examined (6 months to <1 year, 1 to <2 years, and 2 to <3 years). There was no significant difference in V-H grating acuity (no evidence of MA) for the astigmatic group as a whole, or when data were analyzed for each age group. CONCLUSIONS: Even in the youngest age group, astigmats tested with astigmatism correction showed reduced acuity for both V and H gratings, which suggests that astigmatism is having a negative influence on visual development. We found no evidence of orientation-related differences in astigmatism-corrected grating acuity, indicating either that MA does not develop before 3 years of age, or that most of the astigmatic children had a type of astigmatism, i.e., hyperopic, that has proven to be less likely than myopic or mixed astigmatism to result in MA.

Accuracy of the Welch Allyn SureSight for measurement of magnitude of astigmatism in 3- to 7-year-old children.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the accuracy of the Welch Allyn SureSight in noncycloplegic measurements of astigmatism as compared to cycloplegic Retinomax K+ autorefractor measurements of astigmatism in children from a Native American population with a high prevalence of high astigmatism. METHODS: Data are reported for 825 3- to 7-year-old children with no ocular abnormalities. Each child had a Retinomax K+ cycloplegic measurement of right eye astigmatism with a confidence rating > or =8 and 3 attempts to obtain a SureSight measurement on the right eye. RESULTS: SureSight measurement success rates did not differ significantly across age or measurement confidence rating (<6 vs > or =6). Ninety-six percent of children had at least 1 measurement (any confidence), and 89% had at least 1 measurement with confidence at the manufacturer's recommended value (> or =6). Overall, the SureSight tended to overestimate astigmatism. If the SureSight measurement had any dioptric value (0.00 D to 3.00 D), astigmatism of 2.00 D or less was likely to be present. If the SureSight showed astigmatism beyond the instrument's dioptric range (>3.00 D), Retinomax K+ measurements indicated that >2.00 D of astigmatism was present in 136 of 157 (86.6%). In cooperative children for whom the SureSight would not give a reading, 32 of 34 (94%) had >3.00 D of astigmatism. CONCLUSIONS: The SureSight does not provide an accurate, quantitative measure of amount of astigmatism. However, it does allow accurate categorization of amount of astigmatism as < or =2.00 D, >2.00 D, or >3.00 D, and it has high measurement success rate in young children.

Normative monocular visual acuity for early treatment diabetic retinopathy study charts in emmetropic children 5 to 12 years of age.

OBJECTIVE: To provide normative data for children tested with Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) charts. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 252 Native American (Tohono O'odham) children aged 5 to 12 years. On the basis of cycloplegic refraction conducted on the day of testing, all were emmetropic (myopia < or =0.25 diopter [D] spherical equivalent, hyperopia < or =1.00 D spherical equivalent, and astigmatism < or =0.50 D in both eyes). METHODS: Monocular visual acuity was tested at 4 m, using 1 ETDRS chart for the right eye (RE) and another for the left eye (LE). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Visual acuity was scored as the total number of letters correctly identified, by naming or matching to letters on a lap card, and as the smallest letter size for which the child identified 3 of 5 letters correctly. RESULTS: Visual acuity results did not differ for the RE versus the LE, so data are reported for the RE only. Mean visual acuity for 5-year-olds (0.16 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution [logMAR] [20/29]) was significantly worse than for 8-, 9-, 10-, 11-, and 12-year-olds (0.05 logMAR [20/22] or better at each age). The lower 95% prediction limit for determining whether a child has visual acuity within the normal range was 0.38 (20/48) for 5-year-olds and 0.30 (20/40) for 6- to 12-year-olds, which was reduced to 0.32 (20/42) for 5-year-olds and 0.21 (20/32) for 6- to 12-year-olds when recalculated with outlying data points removed. Mean interocular acuity difference did not vary by age, averaging less than 1 logMAR line at each age, with a lower 95% prediction limit of 0.17 log unit (1.7 logMAR lines) across all ages. CONCLUSIONS: For monocular visual acuity based on ETDRS charts to be in the normal range, it must be better than 20/50 for 5-year-olds and better than 20/40 for 6- to 12-year-olds. Normal interocular acuity difference includes values of less than 2 logMAR lines. Normative ETDRS visual acuity values are not as good as norms reported for adults, suggesting that a child's visual acuity results should be compared with norms based on data from children, not with adult norms.

A comparison of Lea Symbol vs ETDRS letter distance visual acuity in a population of young children with a high prevalence of astigmatism.

PURPOSE: To compare visual acuity results obtained by use of the Lea Symbols chart with results obtained with Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) charts in young children who are members of a population with a high prevalence of astigmatism. METHODS: Subjects were 438 children ages 5 through 7 years who were enrolled in kindergarten or first grade on the Tohono O'odham Reservation: 241 (55%) had astigmatism >or=1.00 D in one or both eyes (range, 0.00-6.75 D). While wearing best correction, each child had right eye visual acuity tested with the 62 cm by 65 cm Lea Symbols chart at 3 m and with the 62 cm by 65 cm ETDRS chart at 4 m. Visual acuity was scored as the smallest optotype size at which the child correctly identified 3 of a maximum of 5 optotypes. ETDRS visual acuity also was scored based on the total number of letters that the child correctly identified. RESULTS: Correlation between Lea Symbols visual acuity and ETDRS visual acuity was 0.78 (p < 0.001). Mean Lea Symbols visual acuity was one-half line (0.04-0.06 logMAR) better than mean ETDRS visual acuity (p < 0.001). The difference between Lea Symbols and ETDRS visual acuity was not correlated with the mean of the Lea Symbols and ETDRS visual acuity scores, which ranged from -0.3 logMAR (20/10) to 0.74 logMAR (20/110). CONCLUSIONS: In this population of young children, in whom the primary source of reduced visual acuity is astigmatism-related amblyopia, the Lea Symbols chart produced visual acuity scores that were about 0.5 line better than visual acuity scores obtained with ETDRS charts.

Optical treatment reduces amblyopia in astigmatic children who receive spectacles before kindergarten.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the effect of spectacle correction of astigmatism during preschool on best-corrected recognition visual acuity (VA), grating VA, and meridional amblyopia (difference between acuity for vertical versus horizontal gratings) once the children reach kindergarten. DESIGN: Comparative case series. PARTICIPANTS: Seventy-three astigmatic (right eye > or =1.50 diopters [D] cylinder) Native American (Tohono O'odham) children 5 to 7 years of age. All had with-the-rule astigmatism. In 28 children, the astigmatism was simple myopic, compound myopic, or mixed (M/MA), and in 45 children, it was simple or compound hyperopic (HA). INTERVENTION: Thirty-nine children (Treated Group) had spectacle correction of refractive error, prescribed for full-time wear, in preschool (0.8-2.4 years before testing). Thirty-four children (Untreated Group) had no prior correction. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Comparison of Treated versus Untreated Groups for mean best-corrected right-eye recognition VA, measured with the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart and the Lea Symbols chart, for grating VA, measured with modified Teller acuity card stimuli, and for meridional amblyopia, based on grating acuity results. RESULTS: Mean ETDRS VA was significantly better in the Treated Group (20/37) than in the Untreated Group (20/48; P<0.003), but the difference between mean Lea Symbols VA in the Treated Group (20/33) and in the Untreated Group (20/38) was not significant. No significant Treated versus Untreated Group differences were found for either vertical or horizontal grating acuity. Meridional amblyopia differed between the M/MA group, which showed better acuity for vertical than for horizontal gratings, and the HA group, which showed better acuity for horizontal than for vertical gratings. However, in neither the M/MA group nor the HA group was there a significant difference in magnitude of meridional amblyopia in the Treated versus the Untreated Group. CONCLUSIONS: Spectacle correction during the preschool years results in a significant improvement in best-corrected letter recognition acuity in astigmatic children by the time they reach kindergarten. However, grating acuity was not improved and magnitude of meridional amblyopia was not reduced in children who had received early spectacle correction. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S): Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found after the references.

Anisometropia prevalence in a highly astigmatic school-aged population.

PURPOSE: To describe prevalence of anisometropia, defined in terms of both sphere and cylinder, examined cross-sectionally, in school-aged members of a Native American tribe with a high prevalence of astigmatism. METHODS: Cycloplegic autorefraction measurements, confirmed by retinoscopy and, when possible, by subjective refraction were obtained from 1041 Tohono O'odham children, 4 to 13 years of age. RESULTS: Astigmatism > or =1.00 diopter (D) was present in one or both eyes of 462 children (44.4%). Anisometropia > or =1.00 D spherical equivalent (SE) was found in 70 children (6.7%), and anisometropia > or =1.00 D cylinder was found in 156 children (15.0%). Prevalence of anisometropia did not vary significantly with age or gender. Overall prevalence of significant anisometropia was 18.1% for a difference between eyes > or =1.00 D SE or cylinder. Vector analysis of between-eye differences showed a prevalence of significant anisometropia of 25.3% for one type of vector notation (difference between eyes > or =1.00 D for M and/or > or =0.50 D for J0 or J45), and 16.2% for a second type of vector notation (between-eye vector dioptric difference > or =1.41). CONCLUSIONS: Prevalence of SE anisometropia is similar to that reported for other school-aged populations. However, prevalence of astigmatic anisometropia is higher than that reported for other school-aged populations.

Associations between anisometropia, amblyopia, and reduced stereoacuity in a school-aged population with a high prevalence of astigmatism.

PURPOSE: To describe the relation between magnitude of anisometropia and interocular acuity difference (IAD), stereoacuity (SA), and the presence of amblyopia in school-aged members of a Native American tribe with a high prevalence of astigmatism. METHODS: Refractive error (cycloplegic autorefraction confirmed by retinoscopy), best corrected monocular visual acuity (VA; Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study logMAR charts), and best corrected SA (Randot Preschool Stereoacuity Test) were measured in 4- to 13-year-old Tohono O'odham children (N = 972). Anisometropia was calculated in clinical notation (spherical equivalent and cylinder) and in two forms of vector notation that take into account interocular differences in both axis and cylinder magnitude. RESULTS: Astigmatism >or= 1.00 D was present in one or both eyes of 415 children (42.7%). Significant increases in IAD and presence of amblyopia (IAD >or= 2 logMAR lines) occurred, with >or=1 D of hyperopic anisometropia and >or=2 to 3 D of cylinder anisometropia. Significant decreases in SA occurred with >or=0.5 D of hyperopic, myopic, or cylinder anisometropia. Results for vector notation depended on the analysis used, but also showed disruption of SA at lower values of anisometropia than were associated with increases in IAD and presence of amblyopia. CONCLUSIONS: Best corrected IAD and presence of amblyopia are related to amount and type of refractive error difference (hyperopic, myopic, or cylindrical) between eyes. Disruption of best corrected random dot SA occurs with smaller interocular differences than those producing an increase in IAD, suggesting that the development of SA is particularly dependent on similarity of the refractive error between eyes.

Changes in visual function following optical treatment of astigmatism-related amblyopia.

Effects of optical correction on best-corrected grating acuity (vertical (V), horizontal (H), oblique (O)), vernier acuity (V, H, O), contrast sensitivity (1.5, 6.0, and 18.0 cy/deg spatial frequency, V and H), and stereoacuity were evaluated prospectively in 4- to 13-year-old astigmats and a non-astigmatic age-matched control group. Measurements made at baseline (eyeglasses dispensed for astigmats), 6 weeks, and 1 year showed greater improvement in astigmatic than non-astigmatic children for all measures. Treatment effects occurred by 6 weeks, and did not differ by cohort (<8 vs. >or= 8 years), but astigmatic children did not attain normal levels of visual function.

Optical treatment of amblyopia in astigmatic children: the sensitive period for successful treatment.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of eyeglass treatment of astigmatism-related amblyopia in children younger than 8 years (range, 4.75-7.99 years) versus children 8 years of age and older (range, 8.00-13.53 years) over short (6-week) and long (1-year) treatment intervals. DESIGN: Prospective, interventional, comparative case-control study. PARTICIPANTS: Four hundred forty-six nonastigmatic (right and left eye, <0.75 diopters [D]) and 310 astigmatic (RE, > or =1.00 D) Native American (Tohono O'odham) children in kindergarten or grades 1 through 6. INTERVENTION: Eyeglass correction of refractive error, prescribed for full-time wear, in astigmatic children. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Amount of change in mean right-eye best-corrected letter visual acuity for treated astigmatic children versus untreated, age-matched nonastigmatic children after short (6-week) and long (1-year) treatment intervals. RESULTS: Astigmatic children had significantly reduced mean best-corrected visual acuity at baseline compared to nonastigmatic children. Astigmats showed significantly greater improvement in mean best-corrected visual acuity (0.08 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution [logMAR] unit; approximately 1 line), than the nonastigmatic children (0.01 logMAR unit) over the 6-week treatment interval. No additional treatment effect was observed between 6 weeks and 1 year. Treatment effectiveness was not dependent on age group (<8 years vs. > or =8 years) and was not influenced by previous eyeglass treatment. Despite significant improvement, mean best-corrected visual acuity in astigmatic children remained significantly poorer than in nonastigmatic children after 1 year of eyeglass treatment, even when analyses were limited to results from highly compliant children. CONCLUSIONS: Sustained eyeglass correction results in significant improvement in best-corrected visual acuity in astigmatic children, including those previously believed to be beyond the sensitive period for successful treatment.

Amblyopia in astigmatic children: patterns of deficits.

Neural changes that result from disruption of normal visual experience during development are termed amblyopia. To characterize visual deficits specific to astigmatism-related amblyopia, we compared best-corrected visual performance in 330 astigmatic and 475 non-astigmatic kindergarten through 6th grade children. Astigmatism was associated with deficits in letter, grating and vernier acuity, high and middle spatial frequency contrast sensitivity, and stereoacuity. Although grating acuity, vernier acuity, and contrast sensitivity were reduced across stimulus orientation, astigmats demonstrated orientation-dependent deficits (meridional amblyopia) only for grating acuity. Astigmatic children are at risk for deficits across a range of visual functions.

Teller Acuity Card norms with and without use of a testing stage.

PURPOSE: To determine whether norms obtained using the Teller Acuity Card stage are appropriate for comparison with results obtained when the stage is not used. METHODS: Eighty children were tested, 20 each at 3.5, 11, 17, and 30 months of age. Binocular grating acuity was measured once with Teller Acuity Cards presented with the stage and once without the stage. Test order was counterbalanced across subjects. Testers were aware that gratings progressed from lower to higher spatial frequencies, but were masked to the absolute spatial frequency of the grating on each card. Testers were masked to acuity results until the child completed testing. RESULTS: Repeated measures ANOVA with age as a between-subjects variable and test setting as a within-subjects variable showed a significant effect of age (p < 0.001) and test setting (p < 0.001), and a significant interaction between age and test setting (p < 0.01). Post-hoc comparisons (with Bonferroni correction) showed that the difference in acuity results obtained with the stage versus without the stage was significant at 17 months (p < 0.05), but not at 3.5, 11, or 30 months. CONCLUSIONS: Grating acuity norms obtained with the Teller Acuity Card stage are appropriate for comparison with data obtained without the stage in children 3.5, 11, and 30 months of age. However, when 17-month-old children are tested without the stage, comparison of results with norms obtained with the stage is problematic, because testing without the stage results in reduced acuity scores in this age group.