Cornea · 2023
Reliability and Agreement of Keratometry Measurements Obtained With Eye Surface Profilometry and Partial Coherence Interferometry.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Martínez-Plaza Elena, Molina-Martín Ainhoa, Piñero David P
Аннотация
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to assess the repeatability of keratometry parameters obtained using the Eye Surface Profiler (ESP) system and their agreement with the IOL Master 500 device.
METHODS: Seventy-one eyes of 71 healthy participants were evaluated. Three repeated measurements were performed using the ESP system. Simulated keratometry in the flat (SimKf) and steep (SimKs) meridians, astigmatism, and axis were obtained. The same parameters were measured using the IOL Master 500 device. The J0 and J45 vector components of the astigmatism were calculated. The intrasession repeatability was analyzed using within-subject SD (Sw) and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Agreement was assessed using paired statistical tests and the Bland-Altman method.
RESULTS: The Sw was 0.07 mm, 0.04 mm, 0.51 D, 0.33 D, and 0.22 D, and the ICC was 0.96, 0.98, 0.74, 0.61, and 0.55 for SimKf, SimKs, astigmatism, J0, and J45, respectively. The mean difference and limits of agreement when comparing the ESP system with the IOL Master 500 device were 0.37 mm (0.08/0.66) for SimKf ( P < 0.001), 0.18 mm (0.00/0.35) for SimKs ( P < 0.001), -0.93 D (-2.42/0.56) for astigmatism ( P < 0.001), 0.51 D (-0.22/1.24) for J0 ( P < 0.001), and 0.06 D (-0.48/0.60) for J45 ( P = 0.09).
CONCLUSIONS: The ESP system provides consistent values for simulated keratometry, showing moderate consistency for astigmatism parameters. Contact lens practitioners should be aware that the ESP system and IOL Master 500 device provide different simulated keratometry from a clinically viewpoint.
METHODS: Seventy-one eyes of 71 healthy participants were evaluated. Three repeated measurements were performed using the ESP system. Simulated keratometry in the flat (SimKf) and steep (SimKs) meridians, astigmatism, and axis were obtained. The same parameters were measured using the IOL Master 500 device. The J0 and J45 vector components of the astigmatism were calculated. The intrasession repeatability was analyzed using within-subject SD (Sw) and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Agreement was assessed using paired statistical tests and the Bland-Altman method.
RESULTS: The Sw was 0.07 mm, 0.04 mm, 0.51 D, 0.33 D, and 0.22 D, and the ICC was 0.96, 0.98, 0.74, 0.61, and 0.55 for SimKf, SimKs, astigmatism, J0, and J45, respectively. The mean difference and limits of agreement when comparing the ESP system with the IOL Master 500 device were 0.37 mm (0.08/0.66) for SimKf ( P < 0.001), 0.18 mm (0.00/0.35) for SimKs ( P < 0.001), -0.93 D (-2.42/0.56) for astigmatism ( P < 0.001), 0.51 D (-0.22/1.24) for J0 ( P < 0.001), and 0.06 D (-0.48/0.60) for J45 ( P = 0.09).
CONCLUSIONS: The ESP system provides consistent values for simulated keratometry, showing moderate consistency for astigmatism parameters. Contact lens practitioners should be aware that the ESP system and IOL Master 500 device provide different simulated keratometry from a clinically viewpoint.