AIM: To determine whether pharmacological mydriasis leads to a significant difference in interobserver agreement of optic disc measurement compared with examination without mydriasis. METHOD: A cross sectional study was performed with a pair of observers examining the optic disc of two randomised groups of patients, one group before diagnostic mydriasis, and the other afterwards. Horizontal and vertical disc diameters and cup/disc ratios were measured with a 78 dioptre lens. The study was repeated with another observer pair and two further groups of patients. RESULTS: In study A 86 subjects were examined in total (52 without and 34 with mydriasis). In study B 87 subjects were examined (45 without and 42 with mydriasis). The 95% limits of agreement of the cup/disc ratio measurement differences were significantly larger without mydriasis (p<0.001 for all studies (F test)). For both studies examination after mydriasis gave significantly greater agreement for vertical and horizontal cup/disc ratios. The cases with good agreement (0.1 difference or better) for vertical cup/disc ratios were 37/52 (72%) and 34 /45 (76%) without mydriasis and 33/34 (97%) and 40/42 (95%) respectively with mydriasis. Similar differences were recorded for horizontal cup/disc ratios. Disc diameter measurement results showed similar differences in study A but were not affected by mydriasis in study B. CONCLUSIONS: Examination of the optic disc without pharmacological mydriasis gives significantly poorer interobserver agreement. In this study, the mean 95% limits of agreement values for all cup/disc ratio values were 0.27 for examination without mydriasis and 0.13 for examination with mydriasis. A measure outside these limits would suggest a real difference. This study indicates that mydriasis is important for reproducible clinical examination in glaucoma.
RCT Entities:
AIM: To determine whether pharmacological mydriasis leads to a significant difference in interobserver agreement of optic disc measurement compared with examination without mydriasis. METHOD: A cross sectional study was performed with a pair of observers examining the optic disc of two randomised groups of patients, one group before diagnostic mydriasis, and the other afterwards. Horizontal and vertical disc diameters and cup/disc ratios were measured with a 78 dioptre lens. The study was repeated with another observer pair and two further groups of patients. RESULTS: In study A 86 subjects were examined in total (52 without and 34 with mydriasis). In study B 87 subjects were examined (45 without and 42 with mydriasis). The 95% limits of agreement of the cup/disc ratio measurement differences were significantly larger without mydriasis (p<0.001 for all studies (F test)). For both studies examination after mydriasis gave significantly greater agreement for vertical and horizontal cup/disc ratios. The cases with good agreement (0.1 difference or better) for vertical cup/disc ratios were 37/52 (72%) and 34 /45 (76%) without mydriasis and 33/34 (97%) and 40/42 (95%) respectively with mydriasis. Similar differences were recorded for horizontal cup/disc ratios. Disc diameter measurement results showed similar differences in study A but were not affected by mydriasis in study B. CONCLUSIONS: Examination of the optic disc without pharmacological mydriasis gives significantly poorer interobserver agreement. In this study, the mean 95% limits of agreement values for all cup/disc ratio values were 0.27 for examination without mydriasis and 0.13 for examination with mydriasis. A measure outside these limits would suggest a real difference. This study indicates that mydriasis is important for reproducible clinical examination in glaucoma.
Authors: Ziad Khoueir; Firas Jassim; Boy Braaf; Linda Yi-Chieh Poon; Edem Tsikata; James Chodosh; Claes H Dohlman; Benjamin J Vakoc; Brett E Bouma; Johannes F de Boer; Teresa C Chen Journal: J Glaucoma Date: 2019-08 Impact factor: 2.503
Authors: Andrew Bastawrous; Mario Ettore Giardini; Nigel M Bolster; Tunde Peto; Nisha Shah; Iain A T Livingstone; Helen A Weiss; Sen Hu; Hillary Rono; Hannah Kuper; Matthew Burton Journal: JAMA Ophthalmol Date: 2016-02 Impact factor: 7.389