Online Circular Contrast Perimetry: Validity and Repeatability of Home Performance.

IF 1.8 4区 医学 Q2 OPHTHALMOLOGY
Yang X Chen, James Corbett, Jesse Gale, Joshua Meyerov, Angela Gong, Jason Cheng, Simon E Skalicky
{"title":"Online Circular Contrast Perimetry: Validity and Repeatability of Home Performance.","authors":"Yang X Chen, James Corbett, Jesse Gale, Joshua Meyerov, Angela Gong, Jason Cheng, Simon E Skalicky","doi":"10.1097/IJG.0000000000002635","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Precis: </strong>Online Circular Contrast Perimetry (OCCP) offers clinically validated threshold perimetry to patients via a web-application from their own devices. This study evaluates the feasibility, repeatability and reliability of OCCP when performed in unsupervised home environments.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To evaluate the feasibility, repeatability and reliability of online circular contrast perimetry (OCCP) when performed in unsupervised home environments on personal devices.</p><p><strong>Patients and methods: </strong>55 participants (20 control and 35 open-angle glaucoma patients) were recruited. Participants underwent baseline visual field testing using OCCP in a clinical setting, followed by weekly unsupervised home tests over six weeks on their personal computers. An online survey was completed afterwards. Global perimetric indices and reliability indices were compared between clinic-based and home-based tests and analyzed to assess the repeatability and reliability of OCCP at home. Rasch analysis assessed the psychometric properties of the survey and intergroup variability.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>No statistically significant differences were found in mean deviation (MD), pattern standard deviation (PSD), or visual index values between home and clinic tests (P>0.05), and these values did not significantly alter over the 6 weekly at-home tests. OCCP false positive and fixation loss responses were statistically higher at home compared to baseline (P=0.002 & P=0.001). Test-retest intraclass correlation coefficients for OCCP home use compared to in-clinic for MD ranged from 0.90 to 0.93, and for PSD ranged from 0.81 to 0.85. Bland-Altman analysis for MD revealed zero test-retest bias with limits of agreement ranging from ±5.28 to ±5.83 dB across the six weeks. The survey indicated high user satisfaction, however Rasch analysis revealed suboptimal precision and targeting.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>OCCP retains a similar diagnostic accuracy and repeatability in home environments on personal devices compared to clinic-based environments and has the potential to be utilized as a remote tool for glaucoma screening and surveillance.</p>","PeriodicalId":15938,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Glaucoma","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Glaucoma","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/IJG.0000000000002635","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Precis: Online Circular Contrast Perimetry (OCCP) offers clinically validated threshold perimetry to patients via a web-application from their own devices. This study evaluates the feasibility, repeatability and reliability of OCCP when performed in unsupervised home environments.

Purpose: To evaluate the feasibility, repeatability and reliability of online circular contrast perimetry (OCCP) when performed in unsupervised home environments on personal devices.

Patients and methods: 55 participants (20 control and 35 open-angle glaucoma patients) were recruited. Participants underwent baseline visual field testing using OCCP in a clinical setting, followed by weekly unsupervised home tests over six weeks on their personal computers. An online survey was completed afterwards. Global perimetric indices and reliability indices were compared between clinic-based and home-based tests and analyzed to assess the repeatability and reliability of OCCP at home. Rasch analysis assessed the psychometric properties of the survey and intergroup variability.

Results: No statistically significant differences were found in mean deviation (MD), pattern standard deviation (PSD), or visual index values between home and clinic tests (P>0.05), and these values did not significantly alter over the 6 weekly at-home tests. OCCP false positive and fixation loss responses were statistically higher at home compared to baseline (P=0.002 & P=0.001). Test-retest intraclass correlation coefficients for OCCP home use compared to in-clinic for MD ranged from 0.90 to 0.93, and for PSD ranged from 0.81 to 0.85. Bland-Altman analysis for MD revealed zero test-retest bias with limits of agreement ranging from ±5.28 to ±5.83 dB across the six weeks. The survey indicated high user satisfaction, however Rasch analysis revealed suboptimal precision and targeting.

Conclusions: OCCP retains a similar diagnostic accuracy and repeatability in home environments on personal devices compared to clinic-based environments and has the potential to be utilized as a remote tool for glaucoma screening and surveillance.

在线圆形对比测量:有效性和可重复性的家庭性能。
Precis: Online Circular Contrast Perimetry (OCCP)通过网络应用程序从患者自己的设备上为患者提供临床验证的阈值测量。本研究评估了OCCP在无监督家庭环境中实施的可行性、可重复性和可靠性。目的:评估在无人监督的家庭环境中使用个人设备进行在线圆形对比度测量(OCCP)的可行性、可重复性和可靠性。患者与方法:共招募55名受试者(对照组20名,开角型青光眼患者35名)。参与者在临床环境中使用OCCP进行基线视野测试,随后在个人电脑上进行为期六周的每周无监督家庭测试。随后完成了一项在线调查。比较临床检测和家庭检测的总体围周指标和可靠性指标,并分析家庭OCCP的可重复性和可靠性。Rasch分析评估了调查的心理测量特性和组间变异性。结果:家庭和临床试验的平均偏差(MD)、模式标准差(PSD)或视觉指标值无统计学差异(P < 0.05),且6周家庭试验期间这些值无显著变化。与基线相比,OCCP假阳性和固定丧失反应在家中有统计学意义上更高(P=0.002和P=0.001)。家庭使用OCCP与临床使用OCCP的相关系数为0.90 ~ 0.93,PSD的相关系数为0.81 ~ 0.85。MD的Bland-Altman分析显示,6周内的重新测试偏差为零,一致性范围为±5.28至±5.83 dB。调查显示用户满意度很高,但Rasch分析显示精度和目标不理想。结论:与临床环境相比,OCCP在家庭环境和个人设备上保持了相似的诊断准确性和可重复性,具有作为青光眼筛查和监测的远程工具的潜力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Glaucoma
Journal of Glaucoma 医学-眼科学
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
10.00%
发文量
330
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Glaucoma is a peer reviewed journal addressing the spectrum of issues affecting definition, diagnosis, and management of glaucoma and providing a forum for lively and stimulating discussion of clinical, scientific, and socioeconomic factors affecting care of glaucoma patients.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信