April 2011
Volume 52, Issue 14
Free
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   April 2011
Reliability Of Measurements With A New Testeye (SISPOT, Vienna Reading Center ) Used In Multicenter Trials To Control For Pixel Size Variations In Different Camera Systems
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Ulrike Sponer
    Department of Ophthalmology, MUW Vienna, Vienna, Austria
  • Christian Simader
    Department of Ophthalmology, MUW Vienna, Vienna, Austria
  • Bianca Gerendas
    Department of Ophthalmology, MUW Vienna, Vienna, Austria
  • Alessio Montuoro
    Department of Ophthalmology, MUW Vienna, Vienna, Austria
  • Ursula Heiling
    Department of Ophthalmology, MUW Vienna, Vienna, Austria
  • Ursula Schmidt-Erfurth
    Department of Ophthalmology, MUW Vienna, Vienna, Austria
  • Vienna Reading Center
    Department of Ophthalmology, MUW Vienna, Vienna, Austria
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships  Ulrike Sponer, None; Christian Simader, None; Bianca Gerendas, None; Alessio Montuoro, None; Ursula Heiling, None; Ursula Schmidt-Erfurth, None
  • Footnotes
    Support  None
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science April 2011, Vol.52, 3700. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Ulrike Sponer, Christian Simader, Bianca Gerendas, Alessio Montuoro, Ursula Heiling, Ursula Schmidt-Erfurth, Vienna Reading Center; Reliability Of Measurements With A New Testeye (SISPOT, Vienna Reading Center ) Used In Multicenter Trials To Control For Pixel Size Variations In Different Camera Systems. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2011;52(14):3700.

      Download citation file:


      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Purpose: : To evaluate the intraoperator reliability and interoperator reliability of measurements with the Simader-Sponer-Testeye (SISPOT) Vienna Reading Center (VRC)

Methods: : The SISPOT was constructed roughly following the characteristics of a Gullstrand eye, it contains a focusing screen with a circle of known size crossed by 12 radial lines. Nine different operators took 5 independent pictures with one SISPOT sticking to a tight protocol concerning image taking and labelling, at 3 different cameras (FF450 Zeiss, HRAII and Spectralis Heidelberg Ing.). Pictures were evaluated digitally using a software to mark 24 points on each picture, PIXS was then calculated automatically. The mean and standard deviation (SD) was calculated for all 27 sets of measurements to evaluate repeatability and for all measurements at the same camera.

Results: : Values for PIXS of FF450 pictures varied between 3,68 µm/pixel (µm/p) and 3,72 µm/p. SD ranged from 0,01 to 0,02 µm/p. 99,73% of the pictures differed less then 2% in PIXS for all operators and 99,73% of all pictures taken differed less then 2% in PIXS indicating a very high intraoperator and interoperator reliability. SD of PIXS of the HRAII picture sets varied between 0,01 and 0,12 µm/p, indicating that it was more difficult to take pictures of consistent quality. For 5 experienced operators 99,73% of the pictures differed less than 2% in PIXS. For 3 operators 68,27% of the pictures differed less than 2% in PIXS. 1 operator reached 95% < 5%. 95% of all HRAII measurements differed less than 5%. The difficulties for less experienced testeye users may be overcome by protocol improvements. For measurements with the Spectralis 95,45% of pictures of all 9 operators differed less than 3% in PIXS. SD range 0,1- 0,9 µm/p. 95,54% of the pictures differed less than 3% in PIXS between the operators.

Conclusions: : The SISPOT is a reliable instrument to judge pixel size of pictures taken with various camera types, independent of the operator, when a tight protocol is followed. This allows to draw conclusions about real lesion size within pictures taken with tested cameras, leading to more safety of decisions concerning patient inclusion/exclusion on digital pictures by reading centers.

Keywords: imaging/image analysis: clinical • clinical research methodology • imaging methods (CT, FA, ICG, MRI, OCT, RTA, SLO, ultrasound) 
×
×

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.

×