Dataset Information

Teleophthalmic Approach for Detection of Corneal Diseases: Accuracy and Reliability.

ABSTRACT: PURPOSE:Corneal and anterior segment diseases cause most of the urgent visits to eye care professionals. We evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of detecting corneal diseases using external photographs from 2 portable cameras for telemedicine purposes. METHODS:This is a prospective study of adults with a clinical diagnosis of corneal pathology including corneal abrasions, ulcers, scars, and pterygia. A cornea specialist provided the gold standard diagnosis by slit-lamp examination. Images of both eyes were obtained using iTouch 5S and Nidek VersaCam cameras in multiple gazes and interpreted by 3 cornea specialists for the presence of pathology. Accuracy to detect disease was compared with gold standard diagnosis, stratified by the camera and grader. Reliability was evaluated with weighted kappa statistics. Graders assessed image quality on a Likert scale from 1 (poor) to 9 (optimal). RESULTS:A total of 198 eyes (110 subjects) were photographed. By gold standard diagnosis, 59 eyes (30%) had corneal scars, 34 (17%) had ulcers, 13 (7%) had abrasions, 10 (5%) had pterygia, and 82 (41%) were normal. Sensitivity to detect AS pathology ranged from 54% to 71% for the iTouch and 66% to 75% for the Nidek, across graders; specificity ranged from 82% to 96% for the iTouch and 91% to 98% for the Nidek. The intergrader reliability was moderate to strong (kappa ranges: 0.54-0.71 for the iTouch; 0.75-0.76 for the Nidek). Quality ratings were variable between graders. CONCLUSIONS:External photographs taken by standard, nonenhanced portable cameras and interpreted remotely by ophthalmologist graders yielded sensitivity values that are not yet suitable for telemedicine applications. Additional work is needed to improve the ability to detect AS pathology remotely.

SUBMITTER: Woodward MA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5646384 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Teleophthalmic Approach for Detection of Corneal Diseases: Accuracy and Reliability.

Woodward Maria A MA Musch David C DC Hood Christopher T CT Greene Jonathan B JB Niziol Leslie M LM Jeganathan V Swetha E VSE Lee Paul P PP

Cornea 20171001 10

<h4>Purpose</h4>Corneal and anterior segment diseases cause most of the urgent visits to eye care professionals. We evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of detecting corneal diseases using external photographs from 2 portable cameras for telemedicine purposes.<h4>Methods</h4>This is a prospective study of adults with a clinical diagnosis of corneal pathology including corneal abrasions, ulcers, scars, and pterygia. A cornea specialist provided the gold standard diagnosis by slit-lamp examination. I ...[more]

PMID: 28820791

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportancePatient care should be informed by clinical practice guidelines, which in turn should be informed by evidence from reliable systematic reviews. The American Academy of Ophthalmology is updating its Preferred Practice Patterns (PPPs) for the management of the following 6 corneal diseases: bacterial keratitis, blepharitis, conjunctivitis, corneal ectasia, corneal edema and opacification, and dry eye syndrome.ObjectiveTo summarize the reliability of the existing systematic reviews addressing interventions for corneal diseases.Data sourceThe Cochrane Eyes and Vision US Satellite database.Study selectionIn this study of published systematic reviews from 1997 to 2017 (median, 2014), the Cochrane Eyes and Vision US Satellite database was searched for systematic reviews evaluating interventions for the management of any corneal disease, combining eyes and vision keywords and controlled vocabulary terms with a validated search filter.Data extraction and synthesisThe study classified systematic reviews as reliable when each of the following 5 criteria were met: the systematic review specified eligibility criteria for inclusion of studies, conducted a comprehensive literature search for studies, assessed risk of bias of the individual included studies, used appropriate methods for quantitative syntheses (meta-analysis) (only assessed if meta-analysis was performed), and had conclusions that were supported by the results of the systematic review. They were classified as unreliable if at least 1 criterion was not met.Main outcomes and measuresThe proportion of systematic reviews that were reliable and the reasons for unreliability.ResultsThis study identified 98 systematic reviews that addressed interventions for 15 corneal diseases. Thirty-three of 98 systematic reviews (34%) were classified as unreliable. The most frequent reasons for unreliability were that the systematic review did not conduct a comprehensive literature search for studies (22 of 33 [67%]), did not assess risk of bias of the individual included studies (13 of 33 [39%]), and did not use appropriate methods for quantitative syntheses (meta-analysis) (12 of 17 systematic reviews that conducted a quantitative synthesis [71%]). Sixty-five of 98 systematic reviews (66%) were classified as reliable. Forty-two of the 65 reliable systematic reviews (65%) addressed corneal diseases relevant to the 2018 American Academy of Ophthalmology PPPs; 33 of these 42 systematic reviews (79%) are cited in the 2018 PPPs.Conclusions and relevanceOne in 3 systematic reviews addressing interventions for corneal diseases are unreliable and thus were not used to inform PPP recommendations. Careful adherence by systematic reviewers and journal editors to well-established best practices regarding systematic review conduct and reporting might help make future systematic reviews in eyes and vision more reliable.

Dataset Information

Teleophthalmic Approach for Detection of Corneal Diseases: Accuracy and Reliability.

Publications

Teleophthalmic Approach for Detection of Corneal Diseases: Accuracy and Reliability.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets