Suppr超能文献

一种低成本、便携式的屈光不正估计设备的准确性:诊断准确性试验的结果。

Accuracy of a low-cost, portable, refractive error estimation device: Results of a diagnostic accuracy trial.

机构信息

Lions Aravind Institute of Community Ophthalmology, Madurai, India.

Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, East Melbourne, Australia.

出版信息

PLoS One. 2022 Aug 3;17(8):e0272451. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0272451. eCollection 2022.

Abstract

PURPOSE

To assess the accuracy of refraction measurements by ClickCheckTM compared with the standard practice of subjective refraction at a tertiary level eye hospital.

DESIGN

Diagnostic accuracy trial.

METHODS

All participants, recruited consecutively, underwent auto-refraction (AR) and subjective refraction (SR) followed by refraction measurement using ClickCheckTM (CR) by a trained research assistant. Eyeglass prescriptions generated using ClickCheckTM and the resulting visual acuity (VA) was compared to SR for accuracy. Inter-rater reliability and agreement were determined using Intra-class correlation and Bland Altman analysis respectively.

RESULTS

The 1,079 participants enrolled had a mean (SD) age of 39.02 (17.94) years and 56% were women. Overall, 45.3% of the participants had refractive error greater than ±0.5D. The mean (SD) spherical corrections were -0.66D (1.85) and -0.89D (2.20) in SR and CR respectively. There was high level of agreement between the spherical power measured using SR and CR (ICC: 0.940 (95% CI: 0.933 to 0.947). For the assessment of cylindrical correction, there was moderate level of agreement between SR and CR (ICC: 0.493 (0.100 to 0.715). There was moderate level of agreement between the VA measurements performed by using corrections from SR and CR (ICC: 0.577 (95% CI: 0.521-0.628). The subgroup analysis based on the age categories also showed high level of agreement for spherical corrections between the two approaches (ICC: 0.900). Bland Altman analysis showed good agreement for spherical corrections between SR and CR (Mean difference: 0.224D; 95% LoA: -1.647 D to 2.096 D) without evidence of measurement bias.

CONCLUSIONS

There was a high level of agreement for spherical power measurement between CR and SR. However, improvements are needed in order to accurately assess the cylindrical power. Being a portable, low-cost and easy-to-use refraction device, ClickCheckTM can be used for first level assessment of refractive errors, thereby enhancing the efficiency of refractive services, especially in low- and-middle-income countries.

摘要

目的

评估 ClickCheckTM 与三级眼科医院主观验光标准方法相比的验光准确性。

设计

诊断准确性试验。

方法

所有连续招募的参与者均接受自动验光(AR)和主观验光(SR),然后由经过培训的研究助理使用 ClickCheckTM(CR)进行验光测量。使用 ClickCheckTM 生成的眼镜处方和由此产生的视力(VA)与 SR 进行准确性比较。使用组内相关系数和 Bland-Altman 分析分别确定观察者间可靠性和一致性。

结果

共纳入 1079 名参与者,平均(标准差)年龄为 39.02(17.94)岁,56%为女性。总体而言,45.3%的参与者有大于±0.5D 的屈光不正。SR 和 CR 中平均(标准差)球镜矫正分别为-0.66D(1.85)和-0.89D(2.20)。SR 和 CR 测量的球镜力之间具有高度一致性(ICC:0.940(95%置信区间:0.933 至 0.947))。对于柱镜矫正的评估,SR 和 CR 之间具有中度一致性(ICC:0.493(0.100 至 0.715))。使用 SR 和 CR 的矫正值进行 VA 测量之间具有中度一致性(ICC:0.577(95%置信区间:0.521 至 0.628))。基于年龄类别进行的亚组分析也显示,两种方法之间的球镜矫正具有高度一致性(ICC:0.900)。Bland-Altman 分析显示 SR 和 CR 之间的球镜矫正具有良好的一致性(平均差异:0.224D;95%置信区间:-1.647 D 至 2.096 D),没有测量偏差的证据。

结论

CR 和 SR 之间的球镜力测量具有高度一致性。然而,需要改进以准确评估柱镜力。作为一种便携式、低成本且易于使用的验光设备,ClickCheckTM 可用于评估屈光不正的初步评估,从而提高屈光服务的效率,特别是在中低收入国家。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c7d9/9348729/cba69e46102c/pone.0272451.g001.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验