Spotlight on Pediavision’s “Spot” Screening Photo Refractor

This is an amazing photo refractor by Pediavision! Lightweight, portable and quite user-friendly, the “Spot” is similar to other products on the market but excels because it uses a different and fresh approach to create usable results. It is an excellent addendum to any eye care professional quiver.  Designed for a pediatric patient whose movement, cooperation and attention is fleeting, the “Spot” calculates the refractive and ocular alignment status of any child within a few seconds.

The Pediavision "Spot"

The Pediavision “Spot” Source: Permission from Pediavision

Pediavision "Spot" used during an office visit

Pediavision “Spot” used during an office visit


Although the device  shines while assessing the vision of a sitting child, I have also tried the “Spot” on a sitting adult who is restless and moves about their chair. Despite their movement, I was able to obtain usable findings.  I also asked the subject to gaze in a “H” pattern and I was able to discern nonconcomitant eye misalignment quickly and easily.  Because it is lightweight and the examiner holds the instrument with two hands, it is not tiring nor unbalanced. In fact, if battery power was not an issue, I suspect that I could have used it until the rechargeable battery gave out, a sterling testimonial to its ease-0f-use.

Photorefractive screening has been reviewed repeatedly in the scientific literature and a partial list of references is available at the end of this blog post.  The literature supports its use in amblyopia and binocular vision screening as well as determining the presence of ametropia and anisometropia as well as strabismus.  In my opinion, it’s refractive determination is not too far off and is a good beginning for the budding refractionist.

In summary, the utility of photorefractive screening is secure. Like all medical technology instruments, it is a product that can expand it’s present boundaries and with additional studies, the “SPOT” by Pediavision can become an integral part of pediatric care.

Additional Reading

  • Ayse, Yilmaz Kiyak, Uretmen Onder, and Kose Suheyla. “Accuracy of Plusoptix S04 in Children and Teens.” Canadian Journal of Ophthalmology. Journal Canadien D’ophtalmologie 46, no. 2 (April 2011): 153–157.
  • Clausen, Michelle M, and Robert W Arnold. “Pediatric Eye/vision Screening. Referral Criteria for the Pedia Vision Plus Optix s 04 Photoscreener Compared to Visual Acuity and Digital Photoscreening. Kindergarten Computer Photoscreening.” Binocular Vision & Strabismus Quarterly 22, no. 2 (2007): 83–89.
  • Matta, Noelle S, Robert W Arnold, Eric L Singman, and David I Silbert. “Can a Photoscreener Help Us Remotely Evaluate and Manage Amblyopia?” The American Orthoptic Journal 61 (2011): 124–127.
  • Moghaddam, Ali Akbar Saber, Abbas Kargozar, Mehran Zarei-Ghanavati, Marzieh Najjaran, Vahideh Nozari, and Mohammad Taghi Shakeri. “Screening for Amblyopia Risk Factors in Pre-verbal Children Using the Plusoptix Photoscreener: a Cross-sectional Population-based Study.” The British Journal of Ophthalmology 96, no. 1 (January 2012): 83–86.
  • Nathan, Niraj R, and Sean P Donahue. “Modification of Plusoptix Referral Criteria to Enhance Sensitivity and Specificity During Pediatric Vision Screening.” Journal of AAPOS: The Official Publication of the American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus / American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus 15, no. 6 (December 2011): 551–555.
  • Rajavi, Zhale, Hiva Parsafar, Alireza Ramezani, and Mehdi Yaseri. “Is Noncycloplegic Photorefraction Applicable for Screening Refractive Amblyopia Risk Factors?” Journal of Ophthalmic & Vision Research 7, no. 1 (May 2012): 3–9.
  • Satiani, Nidhi G, and Donald O Mutti. “Screening for Hyperopia in Infants Using the PowerRefractor.” Optometry and Vision Science: Official Publication of the American Academy of Optometry 88, no. 8 (August 2011): 905–911.
  • Schmidt-Bacher, A E, C Kahlert, and G Kolling. “[Accuracy of Two autorefractors–Pediatric Autorefractor plusoptiX and Retinomax–in Cycloplegic Children in Comparison to Retinoscopy].” Klinische Monatsblätter Für Augenheilkunde 227, no. 10 (October 2010): 792–797.
  • Silbert, David, and Noelle Matta. “ROC Analysis to Improve Sensitivity and Specificity of the PlusoptiX Photoscreener.” Journal of Ophthalmic & Vision Research 7, no. 1 (May 2012): 2.
  • Ugurbas, Silay Canturk, Atilla Alpay, Huseyin Tutar, Haci Murat Sagdik, and Suat Hayri Ugurbas. “Validation of plusoptiX S04 Photoscreener as a Vision Screening Tool in Children with Intellectual Disability.” Journal of AAPOS: The Official Publication of the American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus / American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus 15, no. 5 (October 2011): 476–479.

Disclaimer: These are the personal opinions of Dr. Hom. There are no disclosures for this post. © Copyright 2012 Richard Hom OD MPA aka “Tips4EyeDocs” [nicepaypal type=”Donate”]