Skip to main content

Table 2 Comparison of different venues for preschool vision screening

From: Evidence-based preschool-age vision screening: health policy considerations

Location Advantages disadvantages
MCHC 1.Location of well-child pediatric visits in Israel
2.Presence of parents
3. Built in follow-up
1. Staff overwhelmed with current workload.
2. Low compliance with well-child screening at relevant ages.
3. Sensitivity lower when pediatricians and nurses do vision screening techniques such as VA, cover-test, red reflex, motilities, etc.,
4.Intensive training would be needed for pediatricians and nurses to use retinoscopy
5. Optometrists performing vision screening would require addition human resources and accompanying expense.
Preschool Can get high coverage due to “captive audience” 1.No follow-up built into the system
2. Parents not present.
3.School health services are not currently uniform – some government, some private
4.Staff overwhelmed with current responsibilities so new staff would have to be hired or service out sourced
Pediatrician at healthcare funds High coverage since most children of relevant ages see a pediatrician at least once during relevant time period 1. These are primarily sick-child visits. Screening a sick child can give invalid results.
2. Time constraints of pediatricians' acute care visits.
3. Same limitations about types of exams as discussed for MCHC.
4. Standard well child visits was first recommended in 2019 [70]. Compliance for well visits likely to be low in near future.
Optometrist at healthcare funds 1.Trained professionals
2. Good controlled environment for screening children.
3.Parents present
4. Data would be part of electronic medical record and thus facilitate follow-up
1.Currently unfunded
2. Parental compliance for any well visit likely to be low.