Patient experience and repeatability of measurements made with the Pentacam HR in patients with keratoconus.
Keratoconus
Pentacam HR
Repeatability
Tomography
Journal
BMC ophthalmology
ISSN: 1471-2415
Titre abrégé: BMC Ophthalmol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100967802
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
08 May 2023
08 May 2023
Historique:
received:
13
02
2023
accepted:
20
04
2023
medline:
9
5
2023
pubmed:
8
5
2023
entrez:
7
5
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
To investigate whether the repeatability of measurements with the Pentacam HR in patients with keratoconus is improved by patients gaining more experience of the measurement situation. Such an improvement could enhance the accuracy with which progressive keratoconus can be detected. Four replicate measurements were performed on Day 0 and on Day 3. Parameters commonly used in the diagnosis of progressive keratoconus were included in the analysis, namely the flattest central keratometry value (K1), the steepest central keratometry value (K2), the maximum keratometry value (Kmax), and the parameters A, B and C from the Belin ABCD Progression Display. In addition, quality parameters used by the Pentacam HR to assess the quality of the measurements were included, namely the analysed area (front + back), 3D (front + back), XY, Z, and eye movements. Neither the diagnostic parameters nor the quality parameters showed any statistically significant improvement on Day 3 compared to Day 0. The quality parameter "eye movements" deteriorated significantly with increasing Kmax. Gaining experience of the measurement situation did not increase the accuracy of the measurements. Further investigations should be performed to determine whether the increasing number of eye movements with increasing disease severity has a negative effect on the repeatability of the measurements.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
To investigate whether the repeatability of measurements with the Pentacam HR in patients with keratoconus is improved by patients gaining more experience of the measurement situation. Such an improvement could enhance the accuracy with which progressive keratoconus can be detected.
METHODS
METHODS
Four replicate measurements were performed on Day 0 and on Day 3. Parameters commonly used in the diagnosis of progressive keratoconus were included in the analysis, namely the flattest central keratometry value (K1), the steepest central keratometry value (K2), the maximum keratometry value (Kmax), and the parameters A, B and C from the Belin ABCD Progression Display. In addition, quality parameters used by the Pentacam HR to assess the quality of the measurements were included, namely the analysed area (front + back), 3D (front + back), XY, Z, and eye movements.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Neither the diagnostic parameters nor the quality parameters showed any statistically significant improvement on Day 3 compared to Day 0. The quality parameter "eye movements" deteriorated significantly with increasing Kmax.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Gaining experience of the measurement situation did not increase the accuracy of the measurements. Further investigations should be performed to determine whether the increasing number of eye movements with increasing disease severity has a negative effect on the repeatability of the measurements.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37150816
doi: 10.1186/s12886-023-02930-4
pii: 10.1186/s12886-023-02930-4
pmc: PMC10165742
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
201Informations de copyright
© 2023. The Author(s).
Références
Cont Lens Anterior Eye. 2007 Sep;30(4):223-32
pubmed: 17481941
Ophthalmologe. 1997 Dec;94(12):902-6
pubmed: 9487761
Am J Ophthalmol. 2021 May;225:38-46
pubmed: 33422466
Acta Ophthalmol. 2023 Feb;101(1):109-116
pubmed: 35811357
Cornea. 2022 Jul 1;41(7):874-878
pubmed: 34294638
BMJ. 1996 Jul 13;313(7049):106
pubmed: 8688716
Ophthalmology. 2021 Nov;128(11):1516-1526
pubmed: 33892046
Cornea. 2015 Apr;34(4):359-69
pubmed: 25738235
Arch Ophthalmol. 1996 Jan;114(1):19-22
pubmed: 8540846
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021 Mar 23;3:CD013512
pubmed: 33765359
PLoS One. 2020 Feb 14;15(2):e0228992
pubmed: 32059036
Optom Vis Sci. 2009 Mar;86(3):170-80
pubmed: 19182699
Klin Monbl Augenheilkd. 2016 Jun;233(6):701-7
pubmed: 26789119
Cornea. 2018 Feb;37(2):177-181
pubmed: 28957978
JAMA Ophthalmol. 2019 Jun 1;137(6):610-616
pubmed: 30920597
Cornea. 2003 Apr;22(3):205-9
pubmed: 12658083
Acta Ophthalmol. 2016 Nov;94(7):675-678
pubmed: 27213687
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2018 Aug 1;59(10):3920-3931
pubmed: 30073363
Cornea. 2020 Feb;39(2):172-180
pubmed: 31369463
Sci Rep. 2018 Aug 17;8(1):12345
pubmed: 30120293
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2008 Apr 22;8:24
pubmed: 18430244
Am J Ophthalmol. 2023 Feb 1;250:95-102
pubmed: 36736417
Ophthalmologica. 1946 Feb-Mar;111(2-3):96-101
pubmed: 20275788
BMJ. 1996 Sep 21;313(7059):744
pubmed: 8819450
Sci Rep. 2021 Aug 6;11(1):16037
pubmed: 34362986
Am J Ophthalmol. 2021 Sep;229:274-287
pubmed: 34048801
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2011 Sep 29;52(10):7731-7
pubmed: 21810981
Eye Vis (Lond). 2017 Oct 25;4:24
pubmed: 29124079
Int Ophthalmol. 2020 Jun;40(6):1481-1485
pubmed: 32076965