Screening older people for impaired vision in primary care: cluster randomised trial. A randomized trial of office-based screening for common problems in older persons. Screening elderly people in primary care: a randomized controlled trial. A randomized trial of a screening, case finding, and referral system for older veterans in primary care. Randomised controlled trial of treatment of unilateral visual impairment detected at preschool vision screening. Improving vision to prevent falls in frail older people: a randomized trial.
To determine the effectiveness of screening for visual impairment in people aged 75 or over as part of a multidimensional screening programme.
                Cluster randomised trial.
                General practices in the United Kingdom participating in the MRC trial of assessment and management of older people in the community.
                4340 people aged 75 years or over randomly sampled from 20 general practices, excluding people resident in hospitals or nursing homes.
                Visual acuity testing and referral to eye services for people with visual impairment. Universal screening (assessment and visual acuity testing) was compared with targeted screening, in which only participants with a range of health related problems were offered an assessment that included acuity screening.
                Proportion of people with visual acuity less than 6/18 in either eye; mean composite score of 25 item version of the National Eye Institute visual function questionnaire.
                Three to five years after screening, the relative risk of having visual acuity < 6/18 in either eye, comparing universal with targeted screening, was 1.07 (95% confidence interval 0.84 to 1.36; P = 0.58). The mean composite score of the visual function questionnaire was 85.6 in the targeted screening group and 86.0 in the universal group (difference 0.4, 95% confidence interval -1.7 to 2.5, P = 0.69).
                Including a vision screening component by a practice nurse in a pragmatic trial of multidimensional screening for older people did not lead to improved visual outcomes. To test the effectiveness of a 10-minute office-staff administered screen to evaluate malnutrition/weight loss, visual impairment, hearing loss, cognitive impairment, urinary incontinence, depression, physical limitations, and reduced leg mobility among older persons seen in office practice. This screen was coupled with clinical summaries to assist the physician in further evaluating and managing the screen-included problems.
                Twenty-six community-based office practices of internists and family physicians in Los Angeles were randomized to intervention or control groups. Two hundred and sixty-one patients aged > or = 70 years and seeing these physicians for a new visit or a physical examination participated in the study. At the enrollment visit intervention group patients were administered the screening measure and their physicians were given the pertinent clinical summaries. Outcome measures were detection of, and intervention for conditions screened, and health status 6 months after the intervention.
                Hearing loss was both more commonly detected (40% intervention versus 28% control) and further evaluated (29% versus 16%) by physicians in the intervention group (P < 0.05). No other differences in the frequency of problem detection or intervention were noted between groups. Six months after the intervention no differences were noted in health status between groups.
                A brief measure to screen for common conditions in older persons was associated with more frequent detection and follow-up assessment of hearing loss. Although the measure was well accepted by physicians and their staffs, it did not appear to affect detection and intervention in regard to the other screen-included conditions, or health status at 6 months. A randomized controlled trial was carried out to test the effectiveness of a screening programme carried out by nurses for elderly people aged 75 years and over in a general practice. A total of 151 people were randomly allocated to the test group and 145 to the control group. The test group received a home visit from a nurse at which an assessment lasting 45 minutes was made of: activities of daily living, social functioning, sensory functions, mental and emotional problems, current medical problems, blood pressure, urinalysis, haemoglobin level and compliance with medication. Both groups completed a selection of items from four health indices before and 20 months after the intervention. At follow up, the test group scored significantly better than the control group on a morale scale. However, this trial provided no evidence for better resolution of physical problems or finding activities of daily living easier in the test group compared with the control group. It is suggested that the main benefit of such a screening process is that the special attention and education provided improves adaptation to old age and awareness of the support systems available. The government has proposed an annual review of elderly people in their own home and this study suggests that the objectives of this scheme should be clarified. To test whether a system of screening, assessment, referral, and follow-up provided within primary care for high-risk older outpatients improves recognition of geriatric conditions and healthcare outcomes.
                Controlled clinical trial with 3-year follow-up; intervention versus control group allocation based on practice group assignment.
                Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) ambulatory care center.
                Seven hundred ninety-two community-dwelling patients aged 65 and older identified by postal screening survey.
                The intervention combined a structured telephone geriatric assessment by a physician assistant, individualized referrals and recommendations, selected referral to outpatient geriatric assessment, and ongoing telephone case management.
                Main outcomes were VA medical record evidence of recognition and evaluation of target geriatric conditions (depression, cognitive impairment, urinary incontinence, falls, functional impairment), functional status (Functional Status Questionnaire, FSQ), and hospitalization (VA databases and self-reported non-VA usage).
                Intervention participants were more likely to have target conditions recognized, evaluated, and referred to specialized services within 12 months of enrollment, although there were no significant differences in FSQ scores or acute hospitalization between intervention and control groups at 1, 2, or 3 years follow-up. Subgroup analyses suggested improvements in depression symptoms and functional impairment at 1-year follow-up in intervention participants with these problems at baseline, but these findings were not evident at later follow-up.
                The intervention increased recognition and evaluation of target geriatric conditions but did not improve functional status or decrease hospitalization. Innovative screening methods can identify older people in need of geriatric services, but achieving measurable improvement in functional status or hospitalization rates will likely require a more-intensive intervention than a program involving primarily unsolicited referrals and short-term consultations. To test the efficacy of treatment for unilateral visual loss detected by preschool vision screening and the extent to which effectiveness varies with initial severity.
                Randomised controlled trial of full treatment with glasses and patching, if required, compared with glasses only or no treatment. Masked assessment of best corrected acuity after one year of follow up.
                Eight UK eye departments.
                177 children aged 3-5 years with mild to moderate unilateral impairment of acuity (6/9 to 6/36) detected by screening.
                Children in the full and glasses treatment groups had incrementally better visual acuity at follow up than children who received no treatment, but the mean treatment effect between full and no treatment was equivalent to only one line on a Snellen chart (0.11 log units; 95% confidence interval 0.050 to 0.171; P < 0.0001). The effects of treatment depended on initial acuity: full treatment showed a substantial effect in the moderate acuity group (6/36 to 6/18 at recruitment) and no significant effect in the mild acuity group (6/9 to 6/12 at recruitment) (P = 0.006 for linear regression interaction term). For 64 children with moderate acuity loss the treatment effect was 0.20 log units, equivalent to one to two lines on a Snellen chart. When all children had received treatment, six months after the end of the trial, there was no significant difference in acuity between the groups.
                Treatment is worth while in children with the poorest acuity, but in children with mild (6/9 to 6/12) unilateral acuity loss there was little benefit. Delay in treatment until the age of 5 did not seem to influence effectiveness. To determine the efficacy of vision and eye examinations, with subsequent treatment of vision problems, for preventing falls and fractures in frail older people.
                Randomized, controlled trial.
                Community in Sydney, Australia.
                Six hundred sixteen men and women aged 70 and older (mean age 81) recruited mainly from people attending outpatient aged care services.
                The intervention group received comprehensive vision and eye examinations conducted by a study optometrist. The optometrist arranged for new eyeglasses for 92 subjects and referred 24 for a home visit with an occupational therapist, 17 for glaucoma management, and 15 for cataract surgery. The control group received usual care.
                Falls and fractures during 12 months of follow-up were ascertained according to self-report using a monthly postcard system.
                Fifty-seven percent of subjects fell at least once during follow-up. Falls occurred more frequently in the group randomized to receive the vision intervention (65% fell at least once; 758 falls in total) than in the control group (50% fell at least once; 516 falls in total). The falls rate ratio using the negative binomial model was 1.57 (95% confidence interval (CI)=1.20-2.05, P=.001). Fractures were also more frequent in the intervention group (31 fractures) than the control group (18 fractures; relative risk from proportional hazards model 1.74, 95% CI=0.97-3.11, P=.06).
                In frail older people, comprehensive vision and eye assessment, with appropriate treatment, does not reduce, and may even increase, the risk of falls and fractures.
There is no evidence that community-based screening of asymptomatic older people results in improvements in vision.