Abstract
Background/aims: The objective of this study is to evaluate the accuracy and speed of trainees and experienced glaucoma specialists using the MatchedFlicker software against the manual examination of stereoscopic disc photographs for detecting glaucomatous optic disc change. Methods: Three experienced glaucoma specialists, two resident ophthalmologists and one glaucoma fellow from multiple institutions independently evaluated the same 140 image pairs from 100 glaucomatous/ocular hypertensive eyes using a handheld stereo viewer and the MatchedFlicker programme. Fifty had progression to glaucoma as determined by the Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study (OHTS) Optic Disc Reading Group and endpoint committee, and 50 more were negative controls for progression with photos taken a few minutes apart. Twenty photo pairs from each of the two groups were duplicated for reviewer variability analysis. The initial viewing method was randomised and then alternated for each group of 70 image pairs. Reviewer accuracy and evaluation time for each method were measured. Results: Evaluators averaged 8.6 s faster per image pair (26%) with the MatchedFlicker programme than with the stereo viewer (p=0.0007). Evaluators correctly identified more image pairs when using the MatchedFlicker software over the stereo viewer (p=0.0003). There was no significant difference between the expert and trainee group in speed or overall accuracy for either method. Experts were significantly more consistent than trainees with the duplicate image pairs (p=0.029). Trainees appeared more reluctant to designate eyes as showing glaucoma progression than experts. Conclusions: Both expert glaucoma specialists and ophthalmologists in various stages of training had greater accuracy and speed with the MatchedFlicker programme than with a handheld stereoscopic viewer.
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 358-363 |
| Number of pages | 6 |
| Journal | British Journal of Ophthalmology |
| Volume | 102 |
| Issue number | 3 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Mar 1 2018 |
| Externally published | Yes |
Fingerprint
Keywords
- diagnostic technology
- electronic medical record
- glaucoma
- matchedflicker
- ophthalmology
- optic disc change
- stereoscopic disc viewing
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Ophthalmology
- Sensory Systems
- Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience
Cite this
Comparing glaucomatous disc change using stereo disc viewing and the MatchedFlicker programme in glaucoma experts and trainees. / Schaefer, Jamie L.; Meyer, Alissa M.; Rodgers, Cooper D.; Rosenberg, Nicole C.; Leoncavallo, Anthony J.; Lukowski, Zachary Lee; Greer, Anthony B.; Martorana, Gina M.; Zou, Baiming; Shuster, Jonathan J.; Jay Katz, L.; Schuman, Joel S.; Kass, Michael A.; Sherwood, Mark B.
In: British Journal of Ophthalmology, Vol. 102, No. 3, 01.03.2018, p. 358-363.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Comparing glaucomatous disc change using stereo disc viewing and the MatchedFlicker programme in glaucoma experts and trainees
AU - Schaefer, Jamie L.
AU - Meyer, Alissa M.
AU - Rodgers, Cooper D.
AU - Rosenberg, Nicole C.
AU - Leoncavallo, Anthony J.
AU - Lukowski, Zachary Lee
AU - Greer, Anthony B.
AU - Martorana, Gina M.
AU - Zou, Baiming
AU - Shuster, Jonathan J.
AU - Jay Katz, L.
AU - Schuman, Joel S.
AU - Kass, Michael A.
AU - Sherwood, Mark B.
PY - 2018/3/1
Y1 - 2018/3/1
N2 - Background/aims: The objective of this study is to evaluate the accuracy and speed of trainees and experienced glaucoma specialists using the MatchedFlicker software against the manual examination of stereoscopic disc photographs for detecting glaucomatous optic disc change. Methods: Three experienced glaucoma specialists, two resident ophthalmologists and one glaucoma fellow from multiple institutions independently evaluated the same 140 image pairs from 100 glaucomatous/ocular hypertensive eyes using a handheld stereo viewer and the MatchedFlicker programme. Fifty had progression to glaucoma as determined by the Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study (OHTS) Optic Disc Reading Group and endpoint committee, and 50 more were negative controls for progression with photos taken a few minutes apart. Twenty photo pairs from each of the two groups were duplicated for reviewer variability analysis. The initial viewing method was randomised and then alternated for each group of 70 image pairs. Reviewer accuracy and evaluation time for each method were measured. Results: Evaluators averaged 8.6 s faster per image pair (26%) with the MatchedFlicker programme than with the stereo viewer (p=0.0007). Evaluators correctly identified more image pairs when using the MatchedFlicker software over the stereo viewer (p=0.0003). There was no significant difference between the expert and trainee group in speed or overall accuracy for either method. Experts were significantly more consistent than trainees with the duplicate image pairs (p=0.029). Trainees appeared more reluctant to designate eyes as showing glaucoma progression than experts. Conclusions: Both expert glaucoma specialists and ophthalmologists in various stages of training had greater accuracy and speed with the MatchedFlicker programme than with a handheld stereoscopic viewer.
AB - Background/aims: The objective of this study is to evaluate the accuracy and speed of trainees and experienced glaucoma specialists using the MatchedFlicker software against the manual examination of stereoscopic disc photographs for detecting glaucomatous optic disc change. Methods: Three experienced glaucoma specialists, two resident ophthalmologists and one glaucoma fellow from multiple institutions independently evaluated the same 140 image pairs from 100 glaucomatous/ocular hypertensive eyes using a handheld stereo viewer and the MatchedFlicker programme. Fifty had progression to glaucoma as determined by the Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study (OHTS) Optic Disc Reading Group and endpoint committee, and 50 more were negative controls for progression with photos taken a few minutes apart. Twenty photo pairs from each of the two groups were duplicated for reviewer variability analysis. The initial viewing method was randomised and then alternated for each group of 70 image pairs. Reviewer accuracy and evaluation time for each method were measured. Results: Evaluators averaged 8.6 s faster per image pair (26%) with the MatchedFlicker programme than with the stereo viewer (p=0.0007). Evaluators correctly identified more image pairs when using the MatchedFlicker software over the stereo viewer (p=0.0003). There was no significant difference between the expert and trainee group in speed or overall accuracy for either method. Experts were significantly more consistent than trainees with the duplicate image pairs (p=0.029). Trainees appeared more reluctant to designate eyes as showing glaucoma progression than experts. Conclusions: Both expert glaucoma specialists and ophthalmologists in various stages of training had greater accuracy and speed with the MatchedFlicker programme than with a handheld stereoscopic viewer.
KW - diagnostic technology
KW - electronic medical record
KW - glaucoma
KW - matchedflicker
KW - ophthalmology
KW - optic disc change
KW - stereoscopic disc viewing
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85042850914&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85042850914&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1136/bjophthalmol-2017-310336
DO - 10.1136/bjophthalmol-2017-310336
M3 - Article
C2 - 28814418
AN - SCOPUS:85042850914
VL - 102
SP - 358
EP - 363
JO - British Journal of Ophthalmology
JF - British Journal of Ophthalmology
SN - 0007-1161
IS - 3
ER -