H P Dunn1,2, C J Kang3, S Marks3, J L Witherow4, S M Dunn3, P R Healey3,5,6, A J White3,5,6. 1. Faculty of Medicine & Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia. hamish.dunn@sydney.edu.au. 2. Department of Ophthalmology, Westmead Hospital, Sydney, Australia. hamish.dunn@sydney.edu.au. 3. Faculty of Medicine & Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia. 4. Discipline of Physiotherapy, Faculty of Medicine & Health Services, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia. 5. Department of Ophthalmology, Westmead Hospital, Sydney, Australia. 6. Centre for Vision Research, Westmead Institute for Medical Research, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Fundoscopy outside ophthalmology is in decline, and the technical demands of the traditional direct ophthalmoscope examination are likely contributing. Alternative fundoscopy technologies are increasingly available, yet valid comparisons between fundoscopy technologies are lacking. We aimed to assess medical students' perceptions of usefulness and ease of use of traditional and contemporary fundus-viewing technologies including smartphone fundoscopy. METHODS:One hundred forty-six second-year medical students participated in a cross-sectional, randomised, cross-over study of fundoscopy methods. Medical students completed small group training sessions using six current fundoscopy technologies including: a non-mydriatic fundus camera; two types of direct fundoscopy; and three types of smartphone fundoscopy. A novel survey of perceived usefulness and ease of use was then completed by students. RESULTS: Repeated-measures ANOVA found students rated both the perceived usefulness (p< 0.001) and ease of use (p< 0.001) of smartphone fundoscopy significantly higher than both the non-mydriatic camera and direct fundoscopy. CONCLUSIONS:Smartphone fundoscopy was found to be significantly more useful and easier to use than other modalities. Educators should optimise student access to novel fundoscopy technologies such as smartphone fundoscopy which may mitigate the technical challenges of fundoscopy and reinvigorate use of this valuable clinical examination.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Fundoscopy outside ophthalmology is in decline, and the technical demands of the traditional direct ophthalmoscope examination are likely contributing. Alternative fundoscopy technologies are increasingly available, yet valid comparisons between fundoscopy technologies are lacking. We aimed to assess medical students' perceptions of usefulness and ease of use of traditional and contemporary fundus-viewing technologies including smartphone fundoscopy. METHODS: One hundred forty-six second-year medical students participated in a cross-sectional, randomised, cross-over study of fundoscopy methods. Medical students completed small group training sessions using six current fundoscopy technologies including: a non-mydriatic fundus camera; two types of direct fundoscopy; and three types of smartphone fundoscopy. A novel survey of perceived usefulness and ease of use was then completed by students. RESULTS: Repeated-measures ANOVA found students rated both the perceived usefulness (p< 0.001) and ease of use (p< 0.001) of smartphone fundoscopy significantly higher than both the non-mydriatic camera and direct fundoscopy. CONCLUSIONS: Smartphone fundoscopy was found to be significantly more useful and easier to use than other modalities. Educators should optimise student access to novel fundoscopy technologies such as smartphone fundoscopy which may mitigate the technical challenges of fundoscopy and reinvigorate use of this valuable clinical examination.
Entities:
Keywords:
Direct ophthalmoscope; Education; Fundoscopy; Non mydriatic camera; Smartphone
Authors: Devin D Mackay; Philip S Garza; Beau B Bruce; Samuel Bidot; Emily B Graubart; Nancy J Newman; Valérie Biousse; Linda P Kelly Journal: Am J Ophthalmol Date: 2014-03 Impact factor: 5.258
Authors: Niraj Mandal; Philip Harborne; Sarah Bradley; Nikki Salmon; Roger Holder; Alastair K Denniston; Philip I Murray Journal: Clin Exp Ophthalmol Date: 2010-10-19 Impact factor: 4.207
Authors: George He; Hamish P Dunn; Kate E Ahmad; Eloise Watson; Andrew Henderson; Dominique Tynan; John Leaney; Andrew J White; Alex W Hewitt; Clare L Fraser Journal: Eur J Neurol Date: 2022-05-31 Impact factor: 6.288