Page 158 - DISINVESTMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION OF VISION SCREENING TESTS BASED ON THEIR EFFECTIVENESS

CHAPTER 8
156
Table 2. preliminary assessment of the implementation outcomes after one year, listed by measurement method and by urban and rural areas.
Acceptability
On-site interviews with nurses, family doctors and kindergarten staff
Urban
& rural
Vision screening was considered as important by the majority of nurses, family doctors and kindergarten staff.
Questionnaires for screeners Questionnaires for family doctors
Urban Rural
& rural
The majority of nurses expressed a positive attitude towards screening and indicated they believe screening is important and should be provided to all children.
Feasibility
On-site interviews with nurses
Urban Rural
The kindergartens were a practical setting, because the nurses see a lot of children every day and know the children and their parents well.
On-site interviews with family doctors
Rural
Most family doctors indicated their nurses lacked time to screen and do the paperwork involved.
On-site interviews with kindergarten staff
Urban Rural
Resident nurses could screen large numbers of children.
Questionnaires for family doctors On-site observation of screening
Rural Urban Rural
Lack of funds, too many patients, personnel costs, travel time to patients in remote areas would make screening difficult.
All rural family doctors considered vision screening important.
The family doctors’ offices were not a practical setting, because parents did not bring their children. Some nurses did not have the time to screen. Screening in rural kindergartens was hampered by low attendance and travel distances.
Kindergartens were considered less practical because of a lack of nurses and the low numbers of children attending.
Nurses were able to carry out screening according to protocol in the kindergartens.
Nurses were able to carry out screening according to protocol in family