Investigation of the Accuracy of a Low-Cost, Portable Autorefractor to Provide Well-Tolerated Eyeglass Prescriptions: A Randomized Crossover Trial.

PURPOSE: To compare patient preferences for eyeglasses prescribed using a low-cost, portable wavefront autorefractor versus standard subjective refraction (SR). DESIGN: Randomized, cross-over clinical trial. PARTICIPANTS: Patients aged 18 to 40 years presenting with refractive errors (REs) to a tertiary eye hospital in Southern India. METHODS: Participants underwent SR followed by autorefraction (AR) using the monocular version of the QuickSee device (PlenOptika Inc). An independent optician, masked to the refraction approach, prepared eyeglasses based on each refraction approach. Participants (masked to refraction source) were randomly assigned to use SR- or AR-based eyeglasses first, followed by the other pair, for 1 week each. At the end of each week, participants had their vision checked and were interviewed about their experience with the eyeglasses. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Patients preferring eyeglasses were chosen using AR and SR. RESULTS: The 400 participants enrolled between March 26, 2018, and August 2, 2019, had a mean (standard deviation) age of 28.4 (6.6) years, and 68.8% were women. There was a strong correlation between spherical equivalents using SR and AR (r = 0.97, P < 0.001) with a mean difference of -0.07 diopters (D) (95% limits of agreement [LoA], -0.68 to 0.83). Of the 301 patients (75.2%) who completed both follow-up visits, 50.5% (n = 152) and 49.5% (n = 149) preferred glasses prescribed using SR and AR, respectively (95% CI, 45.7-56.3; P = 0.86). There were no differences in demographic or vision characteristics between participants with different preferences (P > 0.05 for all). CONCLUSIONS: We observed a strong agreement between the prescriptions from SR and AR, and eyeglasses prescribed using SR and AR were equally preferred by patients. Wider use of prescribing based on AR alone in resource-limited settings is supported by these findings.

[Development and first results of fast and cost-effective examination methods for an ophthalmological screening within the National Cohort]. / Entwicklung und erste Anwendungserfahrungen einer schnellen und kostengünstigen ophthalmologischen Untersuchung für die Nationale Kohorte.

BACKGROUND: For an implemented ophthalmological screening within a German long-term cohort study (National Cohort) simple and effective methods for an examination of visual acuity and for non-mydriatic retina photografies should be evaluated. Furthermore standard operating-procedures (SOP) should be developed. METHODS: In the years 2011 and 2012 pinhole visual acuity measurements and automated retina photographies (DRS, CenterVue S. p. a., Padua, Italy) were made at three different epidemiological study centers within Germany. Furthermore, anterior segment images were taken by the camera. Standard operating procedures (SOP) regarding the ophthalmological screening were developed and evaluated within the study. The main question was whether it is possible to implement the screening methods within the National Cohort. Further main outcomes were quality and interpretability of the taken images. RESULTS: 457 subjects (914 eyes) were examined within the investigation. Median VA was 0.8 for right and left eyes (p > 0.42). Image quality of the photographies was good in 491 cases (54 %), fair in 239 cases (26 %) and bad in 179 cases (20 %). The usability of the images was without limitations in 686 cases (75 %), limited in 152 cases (17 %) and not given in 71 cases (8 %). Increasing age of the subjects was slightly correlated with decreasing image quality (r = 0.26) and decreasing image usability (r = 0.2). Anterior segment photographies were usable in 176 eyes (56 %). CONCLUSION: The developed screening method fulfilled the specifications of the National Cohort. The used pinhole visual acuity examination was fast and cheap. Image quality and usability of the retina photographies could be improved with prolonged pupil recovery times. The quality of the anterior segment images could not fulfill the expectations and were taken out of the further examinations of the ophthalmological screening. The written SOP showed good acceptance within the investigators' daily routine. The ophthalmological screening within the National Cohort generates information (e. g., pathologies of the vessels or of the retina) which are useful not only from an ophthalmological point of view.

[Non mydriatic retinal camera: cost-effectiveness study for early detection of diabetic retinopathy]. / Cámara de retina no midriática: estudio de coste-efectividad en la detección temprana de la retinopatía diabética.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Cost-effectiveness analysis (ACE) for application of fundoscopic photograph with non mydriatic retinal camera (Ffo-CNM) in early diagnostic of diabetic retinopathy (RD) compared with ophthalmoscopic view by pupillary dilation. PATIENTS AND METHOD: diabetic patients, older than 14 years, attended on three Health Primary Care Areas (n=1495). Effectiveness measurement: predictive value of a positive test (VPD) and correctly diagnosed cases. Cost measurement: total cost by patient. ACE: defined as expected cost by VPD case and as expected cost by correctly diagnosed case. The results were submitted to an analysis of sensitivity for the study main variables. RESULTS: Ffo-CNM presented 90.91% of sensitivity [95% CI, 69.4-98.4%], 78.21% of specificity [95% CI, 67.1-86.4%], 54.05% positive predictive value [95% CI, 37.1-70.2%] and 96.83% of negative predictive value [95% CI, 88-99.4%]. Effectiveness, defined as VPD case, was 15.4% for ophthalmoscopic view and 19.5% for Ffo-CNM, and defined as correctly diagnosed case, was 70% and 79.8%, respectively. Cost-effectiveness ratio: a) for health care system, the cost by VPD case was 52.62 euros for ophthalmoscopic view and 28.44 euros for Ffo-CNM and cost by correctly diagnosed case was 11.58 euros and 6.95 euros, respectively, and b) for the society, cost by VPD case was 100.13 euros for ophtalmoscopic view and 34.54 for Ffo-CNM and the cost by correctly diagnosed case was 22.03 euros and 8.44 euros respectively. CONCLUSIONS: If an introduction of a early detection of RD program for the entire diabetic population was decided the option to make it using Ffo-CNM would be the most efficient.