No miscalculations: combining photoscreening with conventional visual-acuity measurement is promising to detect amblyopia at 3 years and 3 years and 9 months
article
Comment on the article: Costs and effects of conventional vision screening and photoscreening in the Dutch preventive child health care system. We thank professor Simonsz for his comments, since it gives us the opportunity to clarify some of our findings. Indeed, with the price for the photoscreening device of €2.29 per child as calculated in our study [1], 608 children need to be screened per device in one year, i.e. on average less than 3 children per working day. At Child Health Care (CHC) locations with medium to high throughput, e.g. in urban areas, this will be possible, with costs per child being less than the €2.29 estimated in the paper if more than 3 children per device per day are screened. However, some CHC locations have a low throughput and may be open only part of the week. In such cases, the portable device may be taken from location to location, or other organizational solutions to reduce the number of devices needed are possible, such as separate screening sessions. Also, as costs per child screened are at least €3.66 less than conventional visual-acuity measurement (VAM) with photoscreening or with the combination of photoscreening and VAM (table 3 of [1]), device costs can more than double without changing the conclusions of this study.
TNO Identifier
953116
Source
European Journal of Public Health, 31(1), pp. 7-12.
Pages
7-12