TY - JOUR
T1 - Quality and diagnostic utility of mydriatic smartphone photography
T2 - The smartphone ophthalmoscopy reliability trial
AU - Adam, Murtaza K.
AU - Brady, Christopher J.
AU - Flowers, Alexis M.
AU - Juhn, Alexander T.
AU - Hsu, Jason
AU - Garg, Sunir J.
AU - Murchison, Ann P.
AU - Spirn, Marc J.
PY - 2015/6/1
Y1 - 2015/6/1
N2 - BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Establish quality and diagnostic utility of mydriatic smartphone ophthalmoscopy (SO) fundus images compared to fundus camera (FC) images. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this prospective, cross-sectional study, 94 consecutive patients in an urban eye emergency department underwent SO and FC fundus imaging via one of three study arms: medical student 1 (MS1), medical student 2 (MS2), and ophthalmology resident (OR). Images of 188 eyes were graded for overall quality by two masked reviewers, and observed critical fundus findings were compared to dilated fundus examination documentation. RESULTS: SO images were higher quality in the OR arm than in the MS1 and MS2 arms (P <.017). There were no differences in FC image quality between photographers (all P > .328). In the OR arm, SO images detected 74.3% of critical fundus findings, whereas FC images detected 77.1%. CONCLUSION: SO produces fundus images approaching the quality and diagnostic utility of traditional FC photographs.
AB - BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Establish quality and diagnostic utility of mydriatic smartphone ophthalmoscopy (SO) fundus images compared to fundus camera (FC) images. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this prospective, cross-sectional study, 94 consecutive patients in an urban eye emergency department underwent SO and FC fundus imaging via one of three study arms: medical student 1 (MS1), medical student 2 (MS2), and ophthalmology resident (OR). Images of 188 eyes were graded for overall quality by two masked reviewers, and observed critical fundus findings were compared to dilated fundus examination documentation. RESULTS: SO images were higher quality in the OR arm than in the MS1 and MS2 arms (P <.017). There were no differences in FC image quality between photographers (all P > .328). In the OR arm, SO images detected 74.3% of critical fundus findings, whereas FC images detected 77.1%. CONCLUSION: SO produces fundus images approaching the quality and diagnostic utility of traditional FC photographs.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84937035739&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84937035739&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.3928/23258160-20150610-06
DO - 10.3928/23258160-20150610-06
M3 - Article
C2 - 26114843
AN - SCOPUS:84937035739
SN - 2325-8160
VL - 46
SP - 631
EP - 637
JO - Ophthalmic Surgery and Lasers
JF - Ophthalmic Surgery and Lasers
IS - 6
ER -