advertisement
PURPOSE: To determine agreement in estimations of vertical cup-to-disc ratio (VCDR) between clinical stereo-biomicroscopic funduscopy and digital fundus image analysis. METHODS: Systematic sampling of 1-in-7 from a sample of 13,591 participants aged ≥40 years gave a subsample who were examined in detail. VCDR was estimated clinically by 60 diopter aspheric lens biomicroscopic funduscopy (c-VCDR) and by digital fundus images (i-VCDR) graded at the Moorfields Eye Hospital Reading Centre. Spearman's correlation coefficient, paired t-test and the Bland-Altman method to assess limits of agreement (LOA) between the two methods were applied. RESULTS: Of 1759 participants in the subsample, 848 participants (48%) with normal frequency doubling technology (FDT) visual fields and data for i-VCDR and c-VCDR in both eyes (n = 1696 eyes) were included in the analysis. By absolute difference of VCDR values for each eye between the two methods, 1585 eyes (94%) differed by ≤0.2. Mean i-VCDR was 0.381 (standard deviation, SD 0.156), and mean c-VCDR 0.321 (SD 0.145). i-VCDRs were significantly larger by a mean difference of 0.061 (SD 0.121; 95% confidence interval, CI, 0.055-0.066; p < 0.001). The 95% LOA assessed by the Bland-Altman method were lower limit -0.182 (95% CI -0.192 to -0.172) and upper limit 0.303 (95% CI 0.293-0.313). The 95% LOA intervals narrowed with higher VCDR. CONCLUSION: Digital image analysis and clinical assessment are two distinct methods to measure VCDR; with larger i-VCDRs in this survey. Applying i-VCDR cut-off values to c-VCDR measurements in the Nigeria Blindness Survey might have underestimated glaucoma prevalence. It is recommended that all participants in glaucoma surveys have VCDR by digital image measurement.
Full article
6.3 Biomicroscopy (slitlamp) (Part of: 6 Clinical examination methods)
6.9.5 Other (Part of: 6 Clinical examination methods > 6.9 Computerized image analysis)