advertisement
Abstract #90386 Published in IGR 21-3
Using an open-source tablet perimeter (Eyecatcher) as a rapid triage measure for glaucoma clinic waiting areas
Jones PR; Lindfield D; Crabb DPBritish Journal of Ophthalmology 2021; 105: 681-686
BACKGROUND: Glaucoma services are under unprecedented strain. The UK Healthcare Safety Investigation Branch recently called for new ways to identify glaucoma patients most at risk of developing sight loss, and of filtering-out false-positive referrals. Here, we evaluate the feasibility of one such technology, Eyecatcher: a free, tablet-based 'triage' perimeter, designed to be used unsupervised in clinic waiting areas. Eyecatcher does not require a button or headrest: patients are simply required to look at fixed-luminance dots as they appear. METHODS: Seventy-seven people were tested twice using Eyecatcher (one eye only) while waiting for a routine appointment in a UK glaucoma clinic. The sample included individuals with an established diagnosis of glaucoma, and false-positive new referrals (no visual field or optic nerve abnormalities). No attempts were made to control the testing environment. Patients wore their own glasses and received minimal task instruction. RESULTS: Eyecatcher was fast (median: 2.5 min), produced results in good agreement with standard automated perimetry (SAP), and was rated as more enjoyable, less tiring and easier to perform than SAP (all p<0.001). It exhibited good separation (area under receiver operating characteristic=0.97) between eyes with advanced field loss (mean deviation (MD) < -6 dB) and those within normal limits (MD > -2 dB). And it was able to flag two thirds of false-positive referrals as functionally normal. However, eight people (10%) failed to complete the test twice, and reasons for this limitation are discussed. CONCLUSIONS: Tablet-based eye-movement perimetry could potentially provide a pragmatic way of triaging busy glaucoma clinics (ie, flagging high-risk patients and possible false-positive referrals).
Division of Optometry and Visual Sciences, City University of London, London, UK peter.jones@city.ac.uk.
Full articleClassification:
6.6.3 Special methods (e.g. color, contrast, SWAP etc.) (Part of: 6 Clinical examination methods > 6.6 Visual field examination and other visual function tests)
