| Comparison of two ophthalmoscopes for direct ophthalmoscopy. | |
| | |
MedLine Citation:
|
PMID: 20796260 Owner: NLM Status: In-Data-Review |
Abstract/OtherAbstract:
|
Background: To measure the ease of use and performance of the Optyse lens-free ophthalmoscope compared with the standard Keeler pocket ophthalmoscope, and to assess its suitability as an inexpensive ophthalmoscope for medical students. Design: Randomized cross-over study. Participants: Twenty second-year medical students, 10 as ophthalmoscopists ('observers') and 10 as 'patients'. Methods: Students used both ophthalmoscopes to examine the optic disc in each eye of 10 'patients'. They were randomized as to the order in which they were used. A Consultant ophthalmologist was used as the gold standard. Main Outcome Measures: Main outcome measures were accuracy in estimating vertical cup:disc ratio (VCDR), ease of use (EOU) for each examination, and overall ease of use (OEOU). Results: Of 400 attempted eye examinations, sufficient visualization was achieved in 220 cases to allow a VCDR estimation: 107/200 VCDR estimates with the Optyse and 113/200 with the Keeler. Accuracy of VCDR estimates was better with the Optyse by the equivalent of 0.05 VCDR (P = 0.002). There was no significant difference in EOU or OEOU between the two ophthalmoscopes. EOU for 400 examinations: median (IQR) of 6 (3-8) for Optyse versus 6 (3-8) for Keeler (P = 0.648). OEOU for 20 scores: median (IQR) of 6.5 (2-9) for Optyse versus 5.5 (3-8) for Keeler (P = 0.21). Conclusion: Medical students found the Optyse and Keeler pocket ophthalmoscopes to be of similar ease of use and performed slightly better with the Optyse when estimating VCDR. The lens-free Optyse ophthalmoscope is a reasonable alternative to the standard Keeler pocket ophthalmoscope. |
| | |
Authors:
|
Niraj Mandal; Philip Harborne; Sarah Bradley; Nikki Salmon; Roger Holder; Alastair K Denniston; Philip I Murray |
Publication Detail:
|
Type: Journal Article Date: 2010-10-19 |
Journal Detail:
|
Title: Clinical & experimental ophthalmology Volume: 39 ISSN: 1442-9071 ISO Abbreviation: Clin. Experiment. Ophthalmol. Publication Date: 2011 Jan |
Date Detail:
|
Created Date: 2011-02-11 Completed Date: - Revised Date: - |
Medline Journal Info:
|
Nlm Unique ID: 100896531 Medline TA: Clin Experiment Ophthalmol Country: Australia |
Other Details:
|
Languages: eng Pagination: 30-6 Citation Subset: IM |
Copyright Information:
|
© 2010 The Authors. Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology © 2010 Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Ophthalmologists. |
Affiliation:
|
College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham Academic Unit of Ophthalmology, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham and Midland Eye Centre, Birmingham, UK. |
Export Citation:
|
APA/MLA Format Download EndNote Download BibTex |
| MeSH Terms | |
Descriptor/Qualifier:
|
|
From MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine
Previous Document: Retinal haemorrhages in inflicted brain injury: the ophthalmologist in court - comment.
Next Document: In vitro compatibility study of cephalosporin with intraocular irrigating solutions and intracameral...