Journal of telemedicine and telecare · 2016
Comparing smartphone camera adapters in imaging post-operative cataract patients.
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.
Sanguansak Thuss, Morley Katharine, Morley Michael, Kusakul Suwat, Lee Ramon, Shieh Eric, Yospaiboon Yosanan, Bhoomibunchoo Chavakij, Chai-Ear Siriwatana, Joseph Anthony, Agarwal Isha
Аннотация
Introduction The goal of this study is to compare image quality and clinical confidence for managing post-operative cataract patients based on anterior segment smartphone images obtained in real-world settings using four types of adapters: (a) macro lens (ML), (b) ML with augmented light-emitting diode (LED) illumination (ML-LED), (c) no adapter (NA) and (d) slit lamp (SL) adapter. Methods Anterior segment images were obtained from 190 eyes after cataract surgery using an eight-megapixel iPhone 6 smartphone camera with four adapters: ML, ML-LED, NA, and SL. Smartphone images were subjectively rated by ophthalmologists as acceptable or not acceptable for: (a) image quality for evaluating the anterior segment structures and (b) reader confidence in clinically managing post-operative patients based on smartphone images. Results NA, ML-LED, and SL had the highest scores for image quality with 100%, 93.7%, and 86.3% judged as acceptable, respectively. NA, SL, and ML-LED were also rated highest in clinical confidence with 100%, 98%, and 93.2% having acceptable levels, respectively. ML was judged lowest in both image quality (61.1% acceptable) and clinical confidence (37.4% acceptable). Discussion This study represents the first effort to compare different smartphone camera adapters' ability to image the anterior segment of the eye in a real-world setting. Our study shows that ML-LED, NA, and SL adapters were acceptable for visualizing anterior segment structures to physician readers in 86-100% of cases. When coupled with visual acuity, intro-ocular pressure and history, these images can result in acceptable clinical confidence in 93-100% of cases.