Akira Obana1,2, Yuko Gohto3, Takatoshi Moriyama3, Takahiko Seto3, Hiroyuki Sasano3, Shigetoshi Okazaki4. 1. Department of Ophthalmology, Seirei Hamamatsu General Hospital, 1-12-12 Sumiyoshi, Naka-ku, Hamamatsu City, Shizuoka, 430-8558, Japan. obana@sis.seirei.or.jp. 2. Department of Medical Spectroscopy, Institute for Medical Photonics Research, Preeminent Medical Photonics Education and Research Center, Hamamatsu University School of Medicine, Hamamatsu, Shizuoka, Japan. obana@sis.seirei.or.jp. 3. Department of Ophthalmology, Seirei Hamamatsu General Hospital, 1-12-12 Sumiyoshi, Naka-ku, Hamamatsu City, Shizuoka, 430-8558, Japan. 4. Department of Medical Spectroscopy, Institute for Medical Photonics Research, Preeminent Medical Photonics Education and Research Center, Hamamatsu University School of Medicine, Hamamatsu, Shizuoka, Japan.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The macular pigment optical density (MPOD) of a Japanese population was measured using a commercially based heterochromatic flicker photometer, the Macular Pigment Screener (MPS2). The objective of the study was to evaluate the accuracy and test-retest reliability of the MPS2 in Asian pigmented eyes. STUDY DESIGN: Experimental study to validate the medical instrument in humans. METHODS: Twenty-four healthy Japanese participants with no systemic or eye diseases (men: 13, women: 11; mean [SD] age 38.6 [10.9 years]) were included. The concordance of the MPOD, obtained using the MPS2 and Macular Metrics II (MM2), and the test-retest reliability were examined. RESULTS: Determination of the MPOD was unsuccessful in 1 participant; thus, the MPOD of 23 participants was analyzed. The mean (SD) MPOD measured with the detail-mode of the MPS2 was 0.63 (0.18) and with that of the MM2, it was 0.72 (0.23). The former was significantly lower than the latter (P = .003, paired t test). The MPOD measured with the MPS2 and the MM2 showed good concordance (r = 0.79, P < .001, Pearson product moment correlation). Bland-Altman analyses showed no systematic errors between the MPS2 and the MM2. The intraclass correlation coefficient over 5 measurement times with the detail-mode of the MPS2 was 0.80, and the mean coefficient of variation was 9.4%. CONCLUSION: The high concordance with the MM2 and good test-retest reliability found by this study suggest that the MPS2 is acceptable for use in a Japanese population. However, the mean MPOD yielded by the MPS2 was significantly lower than that yielded by the MM2. Therefore, the MPS2 and MM2 are not interchangeable in a single study.
PURPOSE: The macular pigment optical density (MPOD) of a Japanese population was measured using a commercially based heterochromatic flicker photometer, the Macular Pigment Screener (MPS2). The objective of the study was to evaluate the accuracy and test-retest reliability of the MPS2 in Asian pigmented eyes. STUDY DESIGN: Experimental study to validate the medical instrument in humans. METHODS: Twenty-four healthy Japanese participants with no systemic or eye diseases (men: 13, women: 11; mean [SD] age 38.6 [10.9 years]) were included. The concordance of the MPOD, obtained using the MPS2 and Macular Metrics II (MM2), and the test-retest reliability were examined. RESULTS: Determination of the MPOD was unsuccessful in 1 participant; thus, the MPOD of 23 participants was analyzed. The mean (SD) MPOD measured with the detail-mode of the MPS2 was 0.63 (0.18) and with that of the MM2, it was 0.72 (0.23). The former was significantly lower than the latter (P = .003, paired t test). The MPOD measured with the MPS2 and the MM2 showed good concordance (r = 0.79, P < .001, Pearson product moment correlation). Bland-Altman analyses showed no systematic errors between the MPS2 and the MM2. The intraclass correlation coefficient over 5 measurement times with the detail-mode of the MPS2 was 0.80, and the mean coefficient of variation was 9.4%. CONCLUSION: The high concordance with the MM2 and good test-retest reliability found by this study suggest that the MPS2 is acceptable for use in a Japanese population. However, the mean MPOD yielded by the MPS2 was significantly lower than that yielded by the MM2. Therefore, the MPS2 and MM2 are not interchangeable in a single study.
Authors: Robin G Abell; Alex W Hewitt; Marko Andric; Penelope L Allen; Nitin Verma Journal: Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol Date: 2014-01-05 Impact factor: 3.117
Authors: Ute E K Wolf-Schnurrbusch; Nicole Röösli; Eva Weyermann; Mirjam R Heldner; Katja Höhne; Sebastian Wolf Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2007-08 Impact factor: 4.799