<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Publishing DTD v1.2d1 20170631//EN" "JATS-journalpublishing1.dtd">
<ArticleSet>
<Article>
<Journal>
<PublisherName>revista-medicina-scolara</PublisherName>
<JournalTitle>The Journal of School and University Medicine</JournalTitle>
<PISSN/>
<EISSN/>
<Volume-Issue>Volume 7 Issue 3</Volume-Issue>
<PartNumber/>
<IssueTopic>Multidisciplinary</IssueTopic>
<IssueLanguage>English</IssueLanguage>
<Season>July - September 2020</Season>
<SpecialIssue>N</SpecialIssue>
<SupplementaryIssue>N</SupplementaryIssue>
<IssueOA>Y</IssueOA>
<PubDate>
<Year>-0001</Year>
<Month>11</Month>
<Day>30</Day>
</PubDate>
<ArticleType>Medical</ArticleType>
<ArticleTitle>EVALUATION OF THE FIRST 24 MONTHS OF THE EUSCREEN PROJECT FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF THE IMPLEMENTATION TEAM</ArticleTitle>
<SubTitle/>
<ArticleLanguage>English</ArticleLanguage>
<ArticleOA>Y</ArticleOA>
<FirstPage>20</FirstPage>
<LastPage>26</LastPage>
<AuthorList>
<Author>
<FirstName>Oana</FirstName>
<LastName>Teodosescu</LastName>
<AuthorLanguage>English</AuthorLanguage>
<Affiliation/>
<CorrespondingAuthor>N</CorrespondingAuthor>
<ORCID/>
<FirstName>Raluca Maria</FirstName>
<LastName>Ursu</LastName>
<AuthorLanguage>English</AuthorLanguage>
<Affiliation/>
<CorrespondingAuthor>Y</CorrespondingAuthor>
<ORCID/>
<FirstName>Mihai</FirstName>
<LastName>Mara</LastName>
<AuthorLanguage>English</AuthorLanguage>
<Affiliation/>
<CorrespondingAuthor>Y</CorrespondingAuthor>
<ORCID/>
<FirstName>Daniela</FirstName>
<LastName>Rajka</LastName>
<AuthorLanguage>English</AuthorLanguage>
<Affiliation/>
<CorrespondingAuthor>Y</CorrespondingAuthor>
<ORCID/>
<FirstName>Simona</FirstName>
<LastName>Cainap</LastName>
<AuthorLanguage>English</AuthorLanguage>
<Affiliation/>
<CorrespondingAuthor>Y</CorrespondingAuthor>
<ORCID/>
<FirstName>Cristina</FirstName>
<LastName>Vladutiu</LastName>
<AuthorLanguage>English</AuthorLanguage>
<Affiliation/>
<CorrespondingAuthor>Y</CorrespondingAuthor>
<ORCID/>
</Author>
</AuthorList>
<DOI/>
<Abstract>INTRODUCTION: The goal of the present paper is to evaluate the Cluj team members’ attitude towards the general progress of the vision screening at the end of the first year of the implementation study in the EUSCREEN project (”Implementation of cost-optimized childhood vision and hearing screening programmes in middle-income countries in Europe”).
METHOD: The analysis covered 7 questionnaires, each comprising an anonymous 20-question survey filled out by the members of the UMF Cluj EUscreen team in January 2019.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: The EUscreen Cluj team members unanimously consider the kindergarten to be the most appropriate location for the screening in the urban areas. In the rural areas, preschoolers who attend kindergarten courses regularly could be screened in kindergarten, while the remaining could be tested in the general practitioner’s office. Although all the respondents mutually agree that the amount of theoretical and practical information in the initial training courses was adequate and that the nurses’ practical skills are fairly good, they also acknowledge that a regular assessment of the accuracy of the visual screening performed by the nurses is needed.
Among the primary reasons for which a higher percentage of children in the rural communes have not yet been enrolled in this screening program were: infrequent attendance of preschoolers to the kindergarten; poor rural coverage of the project; insufficiency of the medical personnel in the rural areas as well as their overloaded daily; poor access to medical services due to social conditions, financial issues, lack of public transportation facilities; parents’ lack of interest in the child’s health and welfare.
Possible approaches that could increase the number of screened children were: raising awareness regarding the importance of detection of visual deficits in childhood; promotion and implementation of visual screening programs at a national level; requirement of a compulsory visual acuity test at the beginning of the school year.
CONCLUSION: Implementation of a screening program for child vision in Romania continues to be a feasible goal, but substantial efforts are still needed, especially in rural areas, to have satisfactory and uniform coverage rates.
Also, it will be possible to increase attendance to screening among all parties involved by: raising more awareness of the importance of detecting visual deficits in childhood, promoting and implementing visual screening programs at national level, and requiring a compulsory visual acuity test at the beginning of the school year.</Abstract>
<AbstractLanguage>English</AbstractLanguage>
<Keywords>visual acuity screening, amblyopia</Keywords>
<URLs>
<Abstract>https://revista-medicina-scolara.ro/ubijournal-v1copy/journals/abstract.php?article_id=9077&title=EVALUATION OF THE FIRST 24 MONTHS OF THE EUSCREEN PROJECT FROM THE
PERSPECTIVE OF THE IMPLEMENTATION TEAM</Abstract>
</URLs>
<References>
<ReferencesarticleTitle>References</ReferencesarticleTitle>
<ReferencesfirstPage>16</ReferencesfirstPage>
<ReferenceslastPage>19</ReferenceslastPage>
<References>1. Brown TH. Childhood hearing impairment. Paediatrics and Child Health. 2019;11(30):6-13
2. Silverstein M, Scharf k, Mayro EL et al. Referral out comes from a vision screening program for schoolaged children. JCJO. 2020, in press
3. Alvi RA, Justason L, Liotta C, et al. The Eagles Eye Mobile: assessing its ability to deliver eye care in a high-risk com munity. J Pediatr Ophthalmol Strabismus 2015;52:98–105.
4. Basch CE. Healthier students are better learners: a missing link in school reforms to close the achievement gap. J Sch Health 2011;81:593–8.
5. Kemper AR, Cohn LM, Dombkowski KJ. Patterns of vision care among Medicaid-enrolled children. Pediatrics 2004;113:190–6.
6. Hark LA, Thau A, Nutaitis A, et al. Impact of eye glasses on academic performance in primary school children. Can J Ophthalmol 2020;55:52–7.
7. Sevan S. Teodosescu O. Amblyopia – etiopathogenesis and current treatment options. Journal of School and University Medicine 2017;4(3):37-43
8. Levi DM. Visual processing in amblyopia: human stud ies. Strabismus 2006 Mar;14(1):11-9
9. Aldebasi YH. Prevalence of amblyopia in primary school children in Qassim province, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Middle East Afr J Ophthalmol 2015 Jan-Mar;22(1):86-91
10. Fu J, Li SM, Liu LR, et al;. Anyang Childhood Eye Study Group. Prevalence of amblyopia and strabismus in a
population of 7th-grade junior high school students in Central China: the Anyang Childhood Eye Study (ACES). Ophthalmic Epidemiol 2014 Jun;21(3):197-203
11. Ganekal S, Jhanji V, Liang Y, Dorairaj S. Prevalence and etiology of amblyopia in Southern India: results from screen ing of school children aged 5-15 years. Ophthalmic Epidemiol 2013 Aug;20(4):228-31
12. Oscar A, Cherninkova S, Haykin V, et al. Ambly opia screening in Bulgaria. J Pediatr Ophthalmol Strabismus 2014;51(5):284-8
13. Vl?du?iu C, C?inap S, Teodosescu O, Ursu RM, Sevan SA, Rajka D, Mara M. Previous expertise and initial attitude to wards vision screening in health care professionals enrolled in EUSCREEN project. Journal of School and University Medicine 2020;7(1-2):12-17
14. Braverman, R. S. (2015). Pediatric vision screening: the Colorado school nurse experience. Journal of American Asso ciation for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus, 19(4), e20.
15. Cockburn J, Redman S, Hill D, Henry E. Public un derstanding of medical screening. J Med Screen. 1995;2(4):224-7. 16. Audit Commission. What seems to be the matter: communication between hospitals and patients. London: HMSO; 1993.
17. Austoker J, McPherson A. Cervical screening. Practi cal guides for general practice. 2nd ed. Oxford: OUP; 1992. Areas of uncertainty.
18. Austoker J. Gaining informed consent for screening is diffi cult—but many misconceptions need to be undone. BMJ. 1999 Sep 18; 319(7212): 722–723.</References>
</References>
</Journal>
</Article>
</ArticleSet>