| Literature DB >> 35444735 |
Toshiaki Goseki1,2,3, Keiko Kunimi1,2,3, Naoko Shioya1, Yuka Iijima1, Manami Sebe1, Karin Hosoya1, Kyo Fukaya1.
Abstract
This study compared the time required to produce nine-directional ocular photographs using the conventional method to that using the newly devised 9Gaze application. In total, 20 healthy adults, 10 adult patients with strabismus, and 10 pediatric patients with amblyopia or strabismus had their ocular photographs taken using a digital camera with PowerPoint 2010, and with an iPad, and iPod touch with 9Gaze. Photographs of 10 healthy patients were taken by orthoptists with <1 year of experience, and the other participants had theirs taken by those with >1 year of experience. The required time was compared between the three devices in all patients and the two orthoptist groups in 20 healthy adults (>1 year and <1 year of experience). The required times were significantly different between the devices: 515.5 ± 187.0 sec with the digital camera, 117.4 ± 17.8 sec with the iPad, and 76.3 ± 14.1 sec with the iPod touch. The required time with the digital camera was significantly different between the two orthoptist groups (404.7 ± 150.8 vs. 626.3 ± 154.2 sec, P=0.007). The use of the 9Gaze application shortened the recording time required. Furthermore, 9Gaze can be used without considering the years of experience of the examiner.Entities:
Keywords: 9Gaze; digital camera; eye movement; eye tracking; gaze; iPad; iPod touch; nine-direction; ocular photograph; usability
Year: 2022 PMID: 35444735 PMCID: PMC9015868 DOI: 10.16910/jemr.15.1.5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Eye Mov Res ISSN: 1995-8692 Impact factor: 1.349
Figure 1.a) Details of creating the nine-direction ocular photograph with the digital camera. b) Details of creating a nine-direction ocular photograph using the 9Gaze.
Figure 2.Comparison of the required times for production of the nine-directional ocular photographs between three groups: a) healthy adults, b) adult patients, c) and pediatric patients. The time required with the digital camera was significantly longer than that with the iPod touch and iPad in all groups (* p < 0.05, ** p < 0.001).
Comparison of the time required with each device according to the years of experience of the orthoptists.
| Years of experience of the orthoptists | a | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| more than 1 year | less than 1 year | ||
| (mean ± standard deviation, sec) | (mean ± standard deviation, sec) | ||
| Digital camera with PowerPoint | 404.7 ± 150.8 | 626.3 ± 154.2 | 0.007 |
| iPad with 9Gaze | 117.5 ± 21.5 | 117.2 ± 14.3 | 0.85 |
| iPod touch with 9Gaze | 71.9 ± 7.5 | 80.7 ± 17.9 | 0.17 |
a Comparison between two groups. Adjusted p values were analyzed by Mann-Whitney U test.