Optometry & Visual Performance 141 Volume 14 | Issue 2 | June 2026 between low VA and poor academic performance, indicating that visual impairments can negatively impact students’ learning and academic outcomes, including information processing and reading comprehension. The effectiveness of SBVS programs is influenced by multiple factors. Socioeconomic barriers, such as limited financial resources, lack of health insurance, and transportation challenges, often prevent families from accessing follow-up care. Cultural beliefs and misconceptions about refractive errors and vision correction can also reduce acceptance and compliance with these programs. Additionally, lack of awareness among parents and teachers about the importance of vision screening can result in missed opportunities for early detection and treatment. Logistical challenges, including shortages of trained personnel, inadequate resources, and a lack of infrastructure, further hinder the implementation of these programs. Difficulties in follow-up, such as the cost of treatment, parental awareness, and school policies, also affect program outcomes.16 Materials and Methods A convenience sampling technique was used, selecting participants who were readily available and who consented. This study was conducted at five schools: Benin Technical College (BTC), Calvary Crown Academy (CCA), Gabus International College (GIC), Russell Group of Schools, and GSTC, all located in Egor LGA, Benin City, Edo State. These individuals were selected based on their eligibility for the study. A survey questionnaire was used to collect data from administrators, teachers, students, and parents. Quantitative data were collected through a survey questionnaire administered to a sample of school teachers, students, and parents in Egor LGA, Edo State. The survey questionnaire was designed to collect information on current practices and policies for SBVS programs, as well as the factors that hinder their implementation. The survey also gathered data on these stakeholders’ perceptions and experiences with SBVS programs, as well as their suggestions for improving the programs to better address the vision needs of school-aged children. Ethical Considerations Before this study, informed consent was sought, and ethical approval was obtained from the University, where the research team is affiliated with the REC approval number: EC/UBEN/LSC.OPT/23/78. All procedures performed in this study were conducted in accordance with the Tenets of the Declaration of Helsinki for the protection of human subjects. Data Analysis The data obtained from this study were analyzed using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 22.0. Descriptive statistics, frequency tables, and percentages were used in the data analysis and interpretation. Results The study surveyed 291 participants, predominantly students (80.1%), teachers (14.8%), administrators (3.4%), and parents (1.7%). Respondents were drawn from six schools in Egor LGA, with Benin Technical College contributing the largest share (57.7%), followed by Calvary Crown Academy (15.5%), GSTC (14.4%), and Gabus International College (10.3%), with minimal representation from Russell Group of Schools (1.0% each). The distribution of respondents from these schools provides a comprehensive view of the status of vision screening programs in the region. Regarding the status of SBVS programs, only 59 respondents (20.3%) reported that their schools conducted such vision screenings in the past year. In contrast, a significant majority (79.7%) indicated that no vision screenings occurred. The frequency varied across schools that conducted screenings: 3.4% of respondents reported that vision screenings were held once a year, 4.1% twice a year, and 1.7% more than twice a year. Notably, 11.0% of respondents were unsure of the frequency of these vision screenings. Respondents provided several explanations for the absence of vision screening programs. Specifically, 33.7% attributed the lack of screenings to insufficient awareness, 23.7% to inadequate resources, and 19.9% to the perception that there was no need for vision screening. A smaller proportion of respondents reported combined reasons: 3.1% cited all three factors, 2.1% indicated a lack of resources and awareness, and 0.3% noted a combination of a lack of understanding and a perceived lack of need. Additionally, 17.2% of respondents had no opinion on the matter. Regarding attitudes toward these programs, 55.3% of respondents expressed an optimistic view, 15.5% were neutral, 4.1% were negative, and 25.1% remained uncertain. The study also assessed knowledge of SBVS, revealing that only
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjEyMDQ0Nw==