Acta paediatrica (Oslo, Norway : 1992) · 2003
Evaluation of screening procedures for congenital cataracts.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Magnusson G, Jakobsson P, Kugelberg U, Lundvall A, Maly E, Tornqvist K, Abrahamsson M, Andreasson B, Borres M P, Broberger U, Hellström-Westas L, Kornfält R, Nelson N, Sjöstrand J, Thiringer K
Аннотация
AIM: To evaluate the efficacy of two different Swedish screening procedures for early detection of congenital cataracts in comparison with no screening.
METHODS: Children born between January 1992 and December 1998 in Swedish regions with an established eye-screening routine procedure, diagnosed with congenital cataract, and operated on before 1 y of age, were included in a retrospective study. Age at referral and age at time of the operation were compared between regions using different screening procedures: screening in the maternity wards (Region 1), at the well-baby clinics (Region 2) and one region without any screening (Region 3).
RESULTS: Seventy-two children were included in the study. Concerning early diagnosis and surgery, Region 1 differed significantly from Regions 2 and 3, which were more similar and were combined for further analysis. The difference in detected cases was greatest at 21 d of age (55% vs 18%; p < 0.001), but persisted even at 100 d of age (78% vs 64%; p < 0.02). Region 1 screening resulted in more and earlier cases detected than the other two regions (22 vs 15 per 100,000 births). In 72% of all cases, surgery was performed in response to referrals from either the maternity wards (36%), or the well-baby clinics (36%). However, half of the cases from the well-baby clinics were detected too late, i.e. at > 100 d.
CONCLUSION: Eye screening in the maternity ward is preferable to well-baby clinic screening and to no screening at all, since it leads to early detection. Screening should also be performed routinely at well-baby clinics within the period when successful treatment is possible.
METHODS: Children born between January 1992 and December 1998 in Swedish regions with an established eye-screening routine procedure, diagnosed with congenital cataract, and operated on before 1 y of age, were included in a retrospective study. Age at referral and age at time of the operation were compared between regions using different screening procedures: screening in the maternity wards (Region 1), at the well-baby clinics (Region 2) and one region without any screening (Region 3).
RESULTS: Seventy-two children were included in the study. Concerning early diagnosis and surgery, Region 1 differed significantly from Regions 2 and 3, which were more similar and were combined for further analysis. The difference in detected cases was greatest at 21 d of age (55% vs 18%; p < 0.001), but persisted even at 100 d of age (78% vs 64%; p < 0.02). Region 1 screening resulted in more and earlier cases detected than the other two regions (22 vs 15 per 100,000 births). In 72% of all cases, surgery was performed in response to referrals from either the maternity wards (36%), or the well-baby clinics (36%). However, half of the cases from the well-baby clinics were detected too late, i.e. at > 100 d.
CONCLUSION: Eye screening in the maternity ward is preferable to well-baby clinic screening and to no screening at all, since it leads to early detection. Screening should also be performed routinely at well-baby clinics within the period when successful treatment is possible.