Paras P Shah, Samuel M Gelnick, Daniel Zhu, Jules A Winokur, Prachi Dua, Howard D Pomeranz, Thomas Perera, Matthew G Gorski
{"title":"Efficacy of a portable non-mydriatic fundus camera for \"rule-out papilledema\" consultations: A prospective study.","authors":"Paras P Shah, Samuel M Gelnick, Daniel Zhu, Jules A Winokur, Prachi Dua, Howard D Pomeranz, Thomas Perera, Matthew G Gorski","doi":"10.1177/11206721241292105","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Ophthalmology is frequently consulted to \"rule-out papilledema.\" We assessed the efficacy of a portable, non-mydriatic fundus camera in detecting optic disc edema in the inpatient and emergency room settings during \"rule-out papilledema\" consultations, comparing to the gold standard dilated fundus examination (DFE).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This prospective, blinded, cohort study included 124 non-mydriatic fundus photographs (62 patients) that were obtained over the 11-month enrollment period. The images, along with a brief clinical history, were evaluated independently by an attending neuro-ophthalmologist (NO), general ophthalmologist (GO), emergency room (ER) physician, and ophthalmology resident (OR), for the presence of disc edema and indication for consultation. Results were compared to DFE. Sensitivity, specificity, and area under receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were determined to evaluate the efficacy of the camera.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>On DFE, disc edema was present in 51 eyes (41.1%). Compared to DFE, NO assessment had the greatest combined sensitivity (84.3%) and specificity (97.3%) for the detection of disc edema, followed by that of GO (sensitivity 77.4%, specificity 100%), OR (sensitivity 96.1%, specificity 80.8%), and ER clinician (sensitivity 68.6%, specificity 89.0%). Areas under ROC curves for NO, GO, OR, and ER physician were all statistically significant for the detection of disc edema (0.908, <i>P</i> < 0.001; 0.892, <i>P</i> < 0.001; 0.885, <i>P</i> < 0.001; 0.788, <i>P</i> < 0.001, respectively).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Clinicians were able to correctly identify optic disc edema using non-mydriatic fundus photography. Non-mydriatic fundus photography may be an effective inpatient or telemedicine tool to assess for optic disc edema.</p>","PeriodicalId":12000,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Ophthalmology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Ophthalmology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/11206721241292105","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose: Ophthalmology is frequently consulted to "rule-out papilledema." We assessed the efficacy of a portable, non-mydriatic fundus camera in detecting optic disc edema in the inpatient and emergency room settings during "rule-out papilledema" consultations, comparing to the gold standard dilated fundus examination (DFE).
Methods: This prospective, blinded, cohort study included 124 non-mydriatic fundus photographs (62 patients) that were obtained over the 11-month enrollment period. The images, along with a brief clinical history, were evaluated independently by an attending neuro-ophthalmologist (NO), general ophthalmologist (GO), emergency room (ER) physician, and ophthalmology resident (OR), for the presence of disc edema and indication for consultation. Results were compared to DFE. Sensitivity, specificity, and area under receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were determined to evaluate the efficacy of the camera.
Results: On DFE, disc edema was present in 51 eyes (41.1%). Compared to DFE, NO assessment had the greatest combined sensitivity (84.3%) and specificity (97.3%) for the detection of disc edema, followed by that of GO (sensitivity 77.4%, specificity 100%), OR (sensitivity 96.1%, specificity 80.8%), and ER clinician (sensitivity 68.6%, specificity 89.0%). Areas under ROC curves for NO, GO, OR, and ER physician were all statistically significant for the detection of disc edema (0.908, P < 0.001; 0.892, P < 0.001; 0.885, P < 0.001; 0.788, P < 0.001, respectively).
Conclusion: Clinicians were able to correctly identify optic disc edema using non-mydriatic fundus photography. Non-mydriatic fundus photography may be an effective inpatient or telemedicine tool to assess for optic disc edema.
期刊介绍:
The European Journal of Ophthalmology was founded in 1991 and is issued in print bi-monthly. It publishes only peer-reviewed original research reporting clinical observations and laboratory investigations with clinical relevance focusing on new diagnostic and surgical techniques, instrument and therapy updates, results of clinical trials and research findings.