...
首页> 外文期刊>Current Eye Research >Agreement of New Automated Matched Alternation Flicker using Undilated Fundus Photography for the Detection of Glaucomatous Structural Change
【24h】

Agreement of New Automated Matched Alternation Flicker using Undilated Fundus Photography for the Detection of Glaucomatous Structural Change

机译:新自动化匹配交替的协议使用未介绍的眼底摄影进行荧光眼的结构变化

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Purpose: To determine the agreement among glaucoma experts and general ophthalmologists regarding detection of glaucomatous structural changes using a new automated matched alternation flicker (AMAF) method with fundus photographs (FPs) of undilated eyes.Methods: Sixty-six pairs of FPs of normal tension glaucoma patients were collected. FPs were taken at intervals of more than 12 months. Alternating flicker images were created using a new AMAF application. In a blinded manner, two glaucoma experts and two general ophthalmologists compared the presence of glaucomatous structural changes using either the AMAF method or the side-by-side comparison method. The interobserver and intraobserver agreements were compared using the Bland and Altman plot analysis.Results: The glaucoma experts detected more glaucoma progression using the AMAF method (average, 50.7%) compared with the side-by-side method (average, 32.5%). General ophthalmologists detected more glaucomatous progression with the AMAF method (average, 40.9%) than with the side-by-side method (average, 25.0%). The AMAF method showed fair to substantial interreader agreement (k = 0.511-0.724) and fair to perfect intrareader agreement (k = 0.631-0.943). Interreader and intrareader agreements using the AMAF method were better for the glaucoma experts compared with the general ophthalmologists.Conclusions: The AMAF method showed more changes in FPs than the classical side-by-side comparison method. Regarding inter- and intrareader agreements, agreement for the glaucoma experts was best using the AMAF method, but for the general ophthalmologists agreement was best using the side-by-side comparison method.
机译:目的:确定青光眼专家和一般眼科医生的协议,了解使用新的自动匹配的交替闪烁(AMAF)方法的未透过眼底的拍摄(FPS)的新自动匹配交替闪烁(AMAF)方法。方法:六十六对正常张力的FPS收集青光眼患者。 FPS以超过12个月的间隔服用。使用新的AMAF应用程序创建交替的闪烁图像。以盲化的方式,两位青光眼专家和两个一般性眼科医生比较了使用AMAF法或并排比较方法的青光眼结构变化的存在。使用Bland和Altman Plot分析进行比较Interobserver和intraobserver协议。结果:与并排方法(平均,32.5%)相比,青光眼专家使用AMAF法(平均为50.7%)检测更多的青光眼进展。一般性眼科医生与AMAF法(平均为40.9%)检测更多的肺脓性进展,而不是以并排方法(平均,25.0%)。 AMAF方法显示了大量的中断人体协议(K = 0.511-0.724)和公平的完美内部协议(K = 0.631-0.943)。与一般眼科医生相比,使用AMAF方法的中断和Intrareader协议对于青光眼专家更好。结论:AMAF方法比古典并排比较方法表现出更多的FPS变化。关于和内部介绍协议,使用AMAF方法最佳的青光眼专家的协议,但对于一般的眼科医生来说,使用并排比较方法最佳。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号