Purchase this article with an account.
S.S. Block, C. Allison, M. Sigler; Repeatability of Screening Tests at the IL Special Olympic Games During 2001–2005 . Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2006;47(13):695.
Download citation file:
© ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)
The purpose is to investigate repeatability of tests used in the Special Olympics Lions Clubs International Opening Eyes (SOLCIOE) Vision Program by comparing data on same subjects at 2 sessions with at least 1 year between sessions.
Subjects were athletes competing at the IL state Special Olympics games during 2001–2005. The screening was open to any athletes attending. 1185 screenings were conducted during the 5 yr period. To ensure testing, data collection and recording were consistent between screenings; test protocols were developed and reviewed each year. Records from the 5 events were reviewed and 155 athletes (77 females, 78 males) were found to have participated at least twice. Only data from the subject's first 2 screenings were compared. The age range was 8–72 yrs. (mean–24.4 yrs.+/–12.7).
Analysis was conducted using the paired t–test comparing the following continuous variables over time: VA (Lea Symbols) at far (OD, OS), near (OU) and sphere & cylinder in each eye (Nikon Retinomax or Marco Autorefractor). No significant differences were found in any category. Correlations were for VA OD–.46, OS–.62, OU–.74, sphere: OD–.93, OS–.91, and cylinder: OD–.82, OS–.82 (p<.01 for each measure). Cover testing results found agreement in 116/155 (74.8%) subjects at far and 118/155 (76%) at near. Agreement on color vision results was found in 91.6% of subjects while stereopsis agreed in 125/155 (80.6%) subjects.
Excellent agreement was found in autorefraction, which is objective, while VA testing showed moderate correlation. In addition, cover testing also showed moderate agreement. This lower agreement may be attributed to limited subject attention, lack of clinical skills, or change in visual/other abilities of the subject between sessions. Suggestions to improve the data include ensuring placing more skilled examiners at these stations, improved review of protocols, and control of potential distractions. Overall the data suggest an acceptable level of repeatability of the screening tests.
This PDF is available to Subscribers Only