Sandra M Brown1, Jay C Bradley. 1. Cabarrus Eye Center, Concord, North Carolina, USA. sbrownmd@cabarruseye.com
Abstract
PURPOSE: To compare the performance of the Marco Nidek ARK-530A autorefractor pupillometer function and the Keeler PupilScan II pupillometer (study pupillometer) against the clinical standard NeurOptics PLR-200 pupillometer (standard pupillometer) for measurement of the dark-adapted pupil diameter. SETTING: Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center, Lubbock, Texas, USA. DESIGN: Evaluation of diagnostic test or technology. METHODS: Subjects aged 20 to 60 years were dark-adapted for 2 minutes at 1 lux ambient illumination. Accommodation was controlled through distance fixation. The dark-adapted pupil diameter was measured with the standard pupillometer, then the study pupillometer, then the autorefractor. Results were compared using Bland-Altman graphs. RESULTS: The autorefractor underestimated the dark-adapted pupil diameter by a mean of 1.03 mm (range 0.0 to 2.3 mm). Thirty-four (85%) measurements were at least 0.5 mm smaller than the corresponding standard pupillometer values, and 16 (40%) were more than 1.0 mm smaller. Observer experience did not improve accuracy. The study pupillometer underestimated the dark-adapted pupil diameter by a mean of 0.31 mm (range 0.0 to 0.9 mm). Ten (25%) measurements were at least 0.5 mm smaller than the standard pupillometer values. Accuracy improved in the final 10 subjects (study pupillometer smaller; mean difference 0.16 mm; range 0.0 to 0.4 mm). CONCLUSIONS: The autorefractor pupillometry function had an unpredictable negative bias (variable underestimation of dark-adapted pupil diameter). The study pupillometer had a slight negative bias but required significant examiner skill and knowledge of normal pupil movement to obtain a valid result. Neither device was sufficiently accurate for confident surgical planning or clinical diagnosis. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE: Neither author has a financial or proprietary interest in any material or method mentioned.
PURPOSE: To compare the performance of the Marco Nidek ARK-530A autorefractor pupillometer function and the Keeler PupilScan II pupillometer (study pupillometer) against the clinical standard NeurOptics PLR-200 pupillometer (standard pupillometer) for measurement of the dark-adapted pupil diameter. SETTING: Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center, Lubbock, Texas, USA. DESIGN: Evaluation of diagnostic test or technology. METHODS: Subjects aged 20 to 60 years were dark-adapted for 2 minutes at 1 lux ambient illumination. Accommodation was controlled through distance fixation. The dark-adapted pupil diameter was measured with the standard pupillometer, then the study pupillometer, then the autorefractor. Results were compared using Bland-Altman graphs. RESULTS: The autorefractor underestimated the dark-adapted pupil diameter by a mean of 1.03 mm (range 0.0 to 2.3 mm). Thirty-four (85%) measurements were at least 0.5 mm smaller than the corresponding standard pupillometer values, and 16 (40%) were more than 1.0 mm smaller. Observer experience did not improve accuracy. The study pupillometer underestimated the dark-adapted pupil diameter by a mean of 0.31 mm (range 0.0 to 0.9 mm). Ten (25%) measurements were at least 0.5 mm smaller than the standard pupillometer values. Accuracy improved in the final 10 subjects (study pupillometer smaller; mean difference 0.16 mm; range 0.0 to 0.4 mm). CONCLUSIONS: The autorefractor pupillometry function had an unpredictable negative bias (variable underestimation of dark-adapted pupil diameter). The study pupillometer had a slight negative bias but required significant examiner skill and knowledge of normal pupil movement to obtain a valid result. Neither device was sufficiently accurate for confident surgical planning or clinical diagnosis. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE: Neither author has a financial or proprietary interest in any material or method mentioned.