Comparison of the efficacy of three direct ophthalmoscopes: a clinical study

Mohana Kuppuswamy Parthasarathy; Ibrahim Faruq; Eugene Arthurs; Vaseudevan Lakshminarayanan

doi:10.1117/12.2529439

30 August 2019 Comparison of the efficacy of three direct ophthalmoscopes: a clinical study

Mohana Kuppuswamy Parthasarathy, Ibrahim Faruq, Eugene Arthurs, Vaseudevan Lakshminarayanan

Proceedings Volume 11104, Current Developments in Lens Design and Optical Engineering XX; 111040T (2019) https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2529439
Event: SPIE Optical Engineering + Applications, 2019, San Diego, California, United States

Abstract

Retinal examination using direct ophthalmoscope is preferred over other techniques for screening purposes because of its portability and high magnification, despite its power sustainability and cost issues. With increasing number of low-cost sustainable devices available in the market, it is important to assess the efficacy of the devices. We compared three devices - Arclight ophthalmoscope, a D-Eye attached to iPhone 6, and conventional ophthalmoscope Heine K180 - in terms of ease of examination, usage, field of view, color rendition, patient comfort, length of examination, and closeness to the eye. Two trained optometrists examined 26 undilated eyes and graded the ease of retinal examination, ease of use and assessed vertical cup:disc ratio (VCDR). Patients reported their comfort level in terms of glare produced by the light source, length of examination and closeness to the eye. The examiners had a good agreement for all assessments. Of 26 eyes, VCDR assessment was not possible in 10/26 (38.4%) of the examinations, in (3/26, 11.5%) examinations with Arclight, in 0/26 examinations with D-Eye. Ease of use score was higher for Arclight and D-Eye than Heine. D-Eye had a relatively larger field of view than other 2 devices. Heine ranked first in color rendition. The luminance level of the high-beam setting of Arclight was more than twice that of Heine and D-Eye. Despite that, the patients reported experiencing uncomfortable glare in Heine (14/26, 53.8%), significant glare with Arclight (16/26, 61.5%) and some/no glare with D-Eye. The examination time was shorter when using D-Eye. Overall, D-Eye scored better in most of the evaluation items followed by Arclight.

Citation Download Citation

Mohana Kuppuswamy Parthasarathy, Ibrahim Faruq, Eugene Arthurs, and Vaseudevan Lakshminarayanan "Comparison of the efficacy of three direct ophthalmoscopes: a clinical study", Proc. SPIE 11104, Current Developments in Lens Design and Optical Engineering XX, 111040T (30 August 2019); https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2529439

ACCESS THE FULL ARTICLE

INSTITUTIONAL
Select your institution to access the SPIE Digital Library.

SELECT YOUR INSTITUTION

PERSONAL
Sign in with your SPIE account to access your personal subscriptions or to use specific features such as save to my library, sign up for alerts, save searches, etc.

PERSONAL SIGN IN

No SPIE Account? Create one

PURCHASE THIS CONTENT

SUBSCRIBE TO DIGITAL LIBRARY

50 downloads per 1-year subscription

Members: $195

Non-members: $335 ADD TO CART

25 downloads per 1 - year subscription

Members: $145

Non-members: $250 ADD TO CART

PURCHASE SINGLE ARTICLE

Includes PDF, HTML & Video, when available