Literature DB >> 30175314

Evaluating a Portable, Noncontact Fundus Camera for Retinopathy of Prematurity Screening by Nonophthalmologist Health Care Workers.

S Grace Prakalapakorn1, Sharon F Freedman1, Amy K Hutchinson2, David K Wallace1, Sandra S Stinnett1, J Wayne Riggins3,4, Keith J Gallaher4.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To evaluate (1) the feasibility of non-ophthalmologist healthcare workers (HCWs) to obtain images of sufficient quality for retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) screening using a FDA-approved portable, non-contact, narrow-field fundus camera (i.e., Pictor™), and (2) the accuracy of grading these images to identify infants who developed treatment-warranted (type 1) ROP.
DESIGN: Prospective cohort study.
SUBJECTS: Infants undergoing routine ROP screening examinations (i.e. birth weight ≤1500 grams and/or gestational age ≤30 weeks or selected infants with a birth weight of 1500-2000g or gestational age >30 weeks and an unstable clinical course).
METHODS: We prospectively recruited infants undergoing ROP screening examinations at a community hospital. On the same day an ophthalmologist examined them, a trained HCW imaged their retinas using the non-contact camera. Two masked ROP experts graded these images remotely. We calculated both the percentage of gradable images (i.e. having at least 3 quadrants with sufficient image quality), as well as the accuracy of identifying infants who developed type 1 ROP. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Percentage of gradable images and the sensitivity and specificity of each grader for identifying infants with type 1 ROP by grading for the presence of pre-plus or plus disease.
RESULTS: Ninety-nine infants were included. Overall, 92.4% and 94.2% of all infant imaging sessions were considered gradable by graders 1 and 2, respectively. Amongst gradable images, the sensitivity of both graders for identifying type 1 ROP by grading for the presence of pre-plus or plus disease was 100% (95% confidence interval (CI): 95-100%) and the specificity 91% (95% CI: 83-95%) for grader 1 and 93% (95% CI: 86-96%) for grader 2.
CONCLUSIONS: It was highly feasible for trained HCWs to obtain digital retinal images of sufficient quality for ROP screening using a non-contact fundus camera. By grading for the presence of pre-plus or plus disease, graders identified infants who developed type 1 ROP with high sensitivity and specificity. The use of portable, non-contact retinal cameras by trained HCWs could increase our workforce in ROP screening and identify infants needing an indirect ophthalmoscopy examination by an ophthalmologist.

Entities:  

Year:  2018        PMID: 30175314      PMCID: PMC6117114          DOI: 10.1016/j.oret.2017.12.003

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ophthalmol Retina        ISSN: 2468-6530


  17 in total

1.  Two-sided confidence intervals for the single proportion: comparison of seven methods.

Authors:  R G Newcombe
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1998-04-30       Impact factor: 2.373

2.  An international classification of retinopathy of prematurity. The Committee for the Classification of Retinopathy of Prematurity.

Authors: 
Journal:  Arch Ophthalmol       Date:  1984-08

3.  ROPtool analysis of images acquired using a noncontact handheld fundus camera (Pictor)--a pilot study.

Authors:  Laura A Vickers; Sharon F Freedman; David K Wallace; S Grace Prakalapakorn
Journal:  J AAPOS       Date:  2015-12       Impact factor: 1.220

4.  Posterior Pole Vascular Changes Before Treatment of Retinopathy of Prematurity.

Authors:  S Grace Prakalapakorn; David K Wallace; Sharon F Freedman
Journal:  JAMA Ophthalmol       Date:  2017-12-01       Impact factor: 7.389

5.  Revised indications for the treatment of retinopathy of prematurity: results of the early treatment for retinopathy of prematurity randomized trial.

Authors: 
Journal:  Arch Ophthalmol       Date:  2003-12

6.  Retinal imaging in premature infants using the Pictor noncontact digital camera.

Authors:  Sasapin G Prakalapakorn; David K Wallace; Sharon F Freedman
Journal:  J AAPOS       Date:  2014-08       Impact factor: 1.220

7.  Retinopathy of prematurity care: patterns of care and workforce analysis.

Authors:  Alex R Kemper; Sharon F Freedman; David K Wallace
Journal:  J AAPOS       Date:  2008-04-25       Impact factor: 1.220

8.  Practice Patterns in Retinopathy of Prematurity Treatment for Disease Milder Than Recommended by Guidelines.

Authors:  Mrinali Patel Gupta; R V Paul Chan; Rachelle Anzures; Susan Ostmo; Karyn Jonas; Michael F Chiang
Journal:  Am J Ophthalmol       Date:  2015-12-15       Impact factor: 5.258

9.  Validity of a telemedicine system for the evaluation of acute-phase retinopathy of prematurity.

Authors:  Graham E Quinn; Gui-shuang Ying; Ebenezer Daniel; P Lloyd Hildebrand; Anna Ells; Agnieshka Baumritter; Alex R Kemper; Eleanor B Schron; Kelly Wade
Journal:  JAMA Ophthalmol       Date:  2014-10       Impact factor: 7.389

10.  The KIDROP model of combining strategies for providing retinopathy of prematurity screening in underserved areas in India using wide-field imaging, tele-medicine, non-physician graders and smart phone reporting.

Authors:  Anand Vinekar; Clare Gilbert; Mangat Dogra; Mathew Kurian; Gangadharan Shainesh; Bhujang Shetty; Noel Bauer
Journal:  Indian J Ophthalmol       Date:  2014-01       Impact factor: 1.848

View more
  7 in total

1.  Feasibility of telemedicine program using a hand-held nonmydriatic retinal camera in Panama.

Authors:  Alexander S Himstead; Janani Prasad; Sean Melucci; Kevin M Gustafson; Paul E Israelsen; Andrew Browne
Journal:  Int J Ophthalmol       Date:  2022-06-18       Impact factor: 1.645

2.  ROPtool analysis of plus and pre-plus disease in narrow-field images: a multi-image quadrant-level approach.

Authors:  Marguerite C Weinert; David K Wallace; Sharon F Freedman; J Wayne Riggins; Keith J Gallaher; S Grace Prakalapakorn
Journal:  J AAPOS       Date:  2020-03-27       Impact factor: 1.220

3.  Practice Guidelines for Ocular Telehealth-Diabetic Retinopathy, Third Edition.

Authors:  Mark B Horton; Christopher J Brady; Jerry Cavallerano; Michael Abramoff; Gail Barker; Michael F Chiang; Charlene H Crockett; Seema Garg; Peter Karth; Yao Liu; Clark D Newman; Siddarth Rathi; Veeral Sheth; Paolo Silva; Kristen Stebbins; Ingrid Zimmer-Galler
Journal:  Telemed J E Health       Date:  2020-03-25       Impact factor: 3.536

4.  Non-contact retinal imaging compared to indirect ophthalmoscopy for retinopathy of prematurity screening: infant safety profile.

Authors:  S Grace Prakalapakorn; Sandra S Stinnett; Sharon F Freedman; David K Wallace; J Wayne Riggins; Keith J Gallaher
Journal:  J Perinatol       Date:  2018-07-02       Impact factor: 2.521

5.  Quantitatively comparing weekly changes in retinal vascular characteristics of eyes eventually treated versus not treated for retinopathy of prematurity.

Authors:  Gloria J Hong; Jagger C Koerner; Marguerite C Weinert; Sandra S Stinnett; Sharon F Freedman; David K Wallace; J Wayne Riggins; Keith J Gallaher; S Grace Prakalapakorn
Journal:  J AAPOS       Date:  2021-02-20       Impact factor: 1.220

Review 6.  Portable hardware & software technologies for addressing ophthalmic health disparities: A systematic review.

Authors:  Margarita Labkovich; Megan Paul; Eliott Kim; Randal A Serafini; Shreyas Lakhtakia; Aly A Valliani; Andrew J Warburton; Aashay Patel; Davis Zhou; Bonnie Sklar; James Chelnis; Ebrahim Elahi
Journal:  Digit Health       Date:  2022-05-06

Review 7.  Telemedicine for Retinopathy of Prematurity.

Authors:  Christopher J Brady; Samantha D'Amico; J Peter Campbell
Journal:  Telemed J E Health       Date:  2020-03-25       Impact factor: 3.536

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.