Department of Optometry, Manipal College of Allied Health Science, Manipal University, Karnataka, India.
Br J Ophthalmol. 2012 Jul;96(7):987-90. doi: 10.1136/bjophthalmol-2012-301751. Epub 2012 Apr 26.
To determine the efficacy of a remotely operated computer-based logarithmic (logMAR) visual acuity chart.
Visual acuity was tested using a laptop or computer-based logMAR chart (COMPlog) for all subjects by two different methods. The methods differed by the physical presence and absence (remote) of an optometrist and in the mode of instructions provided. Remote access was obtained through the internet, using Teamviewer software to control the system linked to COMPlog and instructions were provided by telephone. The order of measurements and the eye to be tested was randomised. logMAR visual acuity and time taken were recorded. A questionnaire was used to assess the participant's feedback.
Intraclass correlation for visual acuity between the two methods (α=0.964, 95% CI 0.937 to 0.979). There was no statistically significant difference (p=0.648) in the median visual acuity measurement between the two methods (median difference 0.00, IQR 0.20 logMAR). The time taken between the two methods was not statistically significant (p=0.457). There was no significant difference in the responses to the questionnaire between the study methods (p=0.119).
Tele (remotely controlled) visual acuity measurement is as reliable as that measured with the physical presence of an optometrist.
确定远程操作的基于计算机的对数(logMAR)视力表的疗效。
通过两种不同的方法,使用笔记本电脑或基于计算机的 logMAR 图表(COMPlog)对所有受试者进行视力测试。这两种方法的区别在于验光师的实际存在(远程)和提供的指导模式。通过互联网使用 Teamviewer 软件远程访问,控制与 COMPlog 链接的系统,并通过电话提供指导。测量的顺序和要测试的眼睛是随机的。记录 logMAR 视力和用时。使用问卷评估参与者的反馈。
两种方法之间的视力(α=0.964,95%置信区间 0.937 至 0.979)的相关性非常好。两种方法的中位视力测量值之间没有统计学上的显著差异(p=0.648)(中位数差异 0.00,IQR 0.20 logMAR)。两种方法之间的用时没有统计学上的显著差异(p=0.457)。两种研究方法之间的问卷回答没有显著差异(p=0.119)。
远程(遥控)视力测量与验光师实际在场时的测量一样可靠。