We conducted a literature review of tools used to evaluate functionality in children with low vision with the aim of analyzing the applicability, advantages, and disadvantages for children <6 years of age, an age at which visual development is mostly complete. Publications in Portuguese, English and, Spanish describing functional evaluation tools for children aged 0-18 years with low vision in the following databases were included: Web of Science, Virtual Health Library, Cochrane, Scielo, and PubMed. A total of 181 articles were collected, 15 of which were included in this review. Thirteen tools were identified, nine of which evaluated overall functionality and quality of life through questionnaires. The other 4 instruments, using a observational test model, evaluated functionality and they were elected. Observational tests chosen for their accuracy and lower selection bias were used to evaluate visual functionality. Of these, the Functional Vision Assessment up to 6 years seems to be promising. In conclusion, we observed a lack of tools for evaluating functionality in children with low vision. This type of evaluation is necessary for planning visual rehabilitation to improve quality of life in children with low vision.

Introduction: In Brazil, congenital toxoplasmosis (CT) is the main cause of visual impairment in childhood. It causes retinochoroiditis, which should lead to blindness. Minas Gerais has a prevalence of 1 newborn with congenital toxoplasmosis for every 770 live births. Objective: To evaluate visual functionality and tasks of self-care with TC classified in groups according to a visual acuity. Method: A cross-sectional study with 96 preschoolers with CT. Ophthalmologic examination and assessment of some functionalities were performed: The Functional Vision Evaluation (AVIF-2 at 6 years) and the Pediatric Disability Assessment Inventory (PEDI-Brazilian version). Results: Children were classified into three groups according to visual acuity: moderate / severe visual loss (n=16), low level (n=39) and normal vision (n=41). The chance of difference is not greater than AVIF-2 at 6 years among the three groups (p=0.001), being (p <0.0001) between the groups with moderate/severe visual and normal vision. The domain scores are displayed as the end result (p=0.022). The test PEDI is not able to make a difference between the groups. It is not different between the scores of the tests carried out. Conclusion: Children with CT without moderate / severe visual impairment, compromising visual functionality with greater impairment without visual accompaniment. The AVIF-2 at 6 years test demonstrated the impairment between groups with different visual acuities. The PEDI (self-care) test was not performed with a significant difference in scores between the groups. The AVIF-2 at 6 years test may contribute to the more effective intervention in the visual habilitation of children with CT and low vision.

No abstract

No abstract