Presentatie Welch Allyn Spot Vision Screener

(1)

Welch Allyn Spot Vision Screener

Innovatieatelier JGZ

Daniel Kok & Karin Feit

28 november 2018

(2)

Page 1

Contacteer ons voor een gratis proefperiode

Daniel Kok

Tel: +31 20 301 1008

daniel.kok@welchallyn.com

Proefperiode Website

Spot Vision Screener Website

Klantenservice

Tel: +31 20 206 1360 (optie 1)

benelux@welchallyn.com

(3)

Page 2

Global Surgical Solutions

Patient Support Systems

Front Line Care

(4)

Page 3

Europees Hoofdkantoor

Amsterdam

Productie & Service

Tilburg - Nederland

Pluvigner – Frankrijk

Lulea – Zweden

Saalfeld – Duitsland

Bologna – Italië

Regionale kantoren

Ashby

Essen

Stockholm

Barcelona

Milan

Paris

Hill-Rom Europa

(5)

(6)

Page 5

Ogen zijn onze passie

(7)

Page 6

Huidige uitdagingen visusscreening

• Tijdrovend

• Laag slagingspercentage

• Twijfels over de accuratesse

• Kinderen met verstandelijke beperking

• Onderzoekskamer te klein voor de Landolt-C-kaart

• Vroegtijdige opsporing amblyopie

Information contained in this slide deck is confidential and should not be distributed further

(8)

Page 7

Een revolutie binnen de visustest

(9)

Page 8

✔

Te gebruiken bij baby's vanaf 6 maanden

✔

Resultaten binnen enkele seconden beschikbaar

✔

Eenvoudige instructies op het scherm

✔

Autocapture (geen opnameknop nodig)

✔

Eenvoudig te gebruiken in de praktijk

✔

Oplaadbare lithium-ion-accu en stekker

✔

Verbinding met EPD mogelijk

(10)

Page 9

Spot detecteert 6 risicofactoren voor amblyopie

Page 9

(11)

Page 10

Instant screening

Selecteer uit de lijst

Voer gegevens in

Kies 1 van de 3 opties om een screening te starten…

(12)

Page 11

…en een kind kan de was doen

Start de screening

Volg de instructies

_{Bekijk de resultaten}

(13)

Page 12

Afgeronde getallen

Onafgerond getallen

Monoculair

Binoculair

Page 12

(14)

Page 13

Makkelijk te begrijpen resultaten zijn direct te delen

(15)

Page 14

Twee opties om data te verwerken

Print het rapport direct van

het apparaat

Verwerk de data in een

spreadsheet en/of EPD

(16)

Page 15

Labelprinter afdruk:

Kan aangepast worden

aan uw wensen

(17)

Page 16

Aanpasbare voor elke setting

Leeftijdsspecifieke criteria kunnen eenvoudig

worden aangepast om aan lokale richtlijnen

te voldoen

(18)

Page 17

Hoge nauwkeurigheid die klinisch is bewezen

Spot vergeleken met pediatrisch oogonderzoek

Background

The Spot Vision Screener has demonstrated good sensitivity and specificity in the pediatric ophthalmology clinic setting. We sought to evaluate the updated Spot (version 2.0.16) in a general pediatric population through a collaboration of the Storm Eye Institute of the Medical University of South Carolina, the Clinica Dr Clorito Picado, and National Children's Hospital of Costa Rica. We compared results of screening with the Spot and pediatric ophthalmologic examination and determined sensitivity and specificity of the Spot in detecting amblyogenic risk factors (ARFs) according to the 2013 AAPOS Vision Screening Committee guidelines for automated vision screeners.

Methods

Children were screened with the Spot followed by a pediatric ophthalmologic examination. Cycloplegic refraction and motility findings were analyzed by age group to determine ARFs.

Results

A total of 219 subjects, averaging 60 months of age (range, 20-119 mo) were included. The prevalence of ARFs in our population was 12.3% (27/219). The most common risk factor was astigmatism, with a prevalence of 8.7% (19/219). The Spot referred 43 children (19.6%). Sensitivity of the Spot was 92.6%; specificity, 90.6%. The positive predictive value was 58.1%; the negative predictive value, 98.9%. Conclusions

The Spot demonstrated good sensitivity and specificity in detecting amblyopia risk factors in this general pediatric population.

Bron: Evaluation of the Spot Vision Screener in young children in Costa Rica. J

AAPOS. 2015 Oct;19(5):441-4. doi: 10.1016/j.jaapos.2015.08.002.

Samenvatting van de studie

(19)

Page 18

Succesvolle meting in 97% van de gevallen

Spot vergeleken met cycloplegische refractie

Purpose

To evaluate the accuracy of the Spot (V2.0.16) and Plusoptix S12 (ROC4, V6.1.4.0) photoscreeners in detecting astigmatism meeting AAPOS referral criteria in students from a population with high prevalence of astigmatism.

Methods

Students attending grades 3–8 on the Tohono O’odham reservation were examined. Screening was attempted with both the Spot and Plusoptix photoscreeners. Results were compared to cycloplegic refraction. Screening attempts providing no estimate of refractive error were considered fail/refer. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) for detection of refractive errors were determined using AAPOS referral criteria and receiver operating characteristic area under the curve (ROC AUC) analysis was conducted for measures of astigmatism. Agreement between screening and cycloplegic refraction measurements of astigmatism, spherical equivalent, and anisometropia were assessed using t tests and correlation analyses.

Results

A total of 209 students were included. Of the total, 116 (55%) met examination-positive criteria based on cycloplegic refraction, with 105 of those (90%) meeting the criterion for astigmatism. Measurements success rates were 97% for Spot and 54% for Plusoptix. Comparing the Spot and the Plusoptix, sensitivity was 96% versus 100%, specificity was 87% versus 61%, PPV was 90% versus 76%, and NPV was 94% versus 100% for detection of refractive error. Both screeners overestimated astigmatism by 1/3 D to 2/3 D. AUC for astigmatism was 0.97 for Spot and 0.83 for Plusoptix.

Conclusions

In this highly astigmatic population, the Spot and the Plusoptix had similar sensitivity, but the Spot had better specificity and measurement success rates. Compared with results from study samples with lower rates of astigmatism, our results highlight the need to assess the ability of screening instruments to detect individual types of refractive errors.

Bron: Accuracy of the Spot and Plusoptix photoscreeners for detection of astigmatism; 2015, Mabel Crescioni, JD, DrPH,

Joseph M. Miller, MD, MPH, and Erin M. Harvey, PhD.

Samenvatting van de studie

(20)

Page 19

Spot het verschil….

SUPERIOR

PRODUCT

FUN TO USE

LOCAL SERVICE

SUPPORT

CLINICAL

EVIDENCE

CLINICAL

SUPPORT

MATERIAL

…en maak het verschil

(21)