OBJECTIVE: To determine the effectiveness of screening for visual impairment in people aged 75 or over as part of a multidimensional screening programme. DESIGN: Cluster randomised trial. SETTING:General practices in the United Kingdom participating in the MRC trial of assessment and management of older people in the community. PARTICIPANTS: 4340 people aged 75 years or over randomly sampled from 20 general practices, excluding people resident in hospitals or nursing homes. INTERVENTION: Visual acuity testing and referral to eye services for people with visual impairment. Universal screening (assessment and visual acuity testing) was compared with targeted screening, in which only participants with a range of health related problems were offered an assessment that included acuity screening. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Proportion of people with visual acuity lessthan 6/18 in either eye; mean composite score of 25 item version of the National Eye Institute visual function questionnaire. RESULTS: Three to five years after screening, the relative risk of having visual acuity < 6/18 in either eye, comparing universal with targeted screening, was 1.07 (95% confidence interval 0.84 to 1.36; P = 0.58). The mean composite score of the visual function questionnaire was 85.6 in the targeted screening group and 86.0 in the universal group (difference 0.4, 95% confidence interval -1.7 to 2.5, P = 0.69). CONCLUSIONS: Including a vision screening component by a practice nurse in a pragmatic trial of multidimensional screening for older people did not lead to improved visual outcomes.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To determine the effectiveness of screening for visual impairment in people aged 75 or over as part of a multidimensional screening programme. DESIGN: Cluster randomised trial. SETTING: General practices in the United Kingdom participating in the MRC trial of assessment and management of older people in the community. PARTICIPANTS: 4340 people aged 75 years or over randomly sampled from 20 general practices, excluding people resident in hospitals or nursing homes. INTERVENTION: Visual acuity testing and referral to eye services for people with visual impairment. Universal screening (assessment and visual acuity testing) was compared with targeted screening, in which only participants with a range of health related problems were offered an assessment that included acuity screening. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Proportion of people with visual acuity less than 6/18 in either eye; mean composite score of 25 item version of the National Eye Institute visual function questionnaire. RESULTS: Three to five years after screening, the relative risk of having visual acuity < 6/18 in either eye, comparing universal with targeted screening, was 1.07 (95% confidence interval 0.84 to 1.36; P = 0.58). The mean composite score of the visual function questionnaire was 85.6 in the targeted screening group and 86.0 in the universal group (difference 0.4, 95% confidence interval -1.7 to 2.5, P = 0.69). CONCLUSIONS: Including a vision screening component by a practice nurse in a pragmatic trial of multidimensional screening for older people did not lead to improved visual outcomes.
Authors: D G Altman; K F Schulz; D Moher; M Egger; F Davidoff; D Elbourne; P C Gøtzsche; T Lang Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2001-04-17 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: J C van der Pols; C J Bates; P V McGraw; J R Thompson; M Reacher; A Prentice; S Finch Journal: Br J Ophthalmol Date: 2000-02 Impact factor: 4.638
Authors: J R Evans; A E Fletcher; R P L Wormald; E Siu-Woon Ng; S Stirling; L Smeeth; E Breeze; C J Bulpitt; M Nunes; D Jones; A Tulloch Journal: Br J Ophthalmol Date: 2002-07 Impact factor: 4.638
Authors: Brenda J Wilson; Susan Courage; Maria Bacchus; James A Dickinson; Scott Klarenbach; Alejandra Jaramillo Garcia; Nicki Sims-Jones; Brett D Thombs Journal: CMAJ Date: 2018-05-14 Impact factor: 8.262
Authors: Christopher G Owen; Alicja R Rudnicka; Liam Smeeth; Jennifer R Evans; Richard P L Wormald; Astrid E Fletcher Journal: BMC Ophthalmol Date: 2006-06-09 Impact factor: 2.209
Authors: Kieran S O'Brien; Valerie M Stevens; Raghunandan Byanju; Ram Prasad Kandel; Gopal Bhandari; Sadhan Bhandari; Jason S Melo; Travis C Porco; Thomas M Lietman; Jeremy D Keenan Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2020-10-15 Impact factor: 2.692