Purchase this article with an account.
A. Lajoie, S. Koreen, L. Wang, S. A. Kane, T. C. Lee, D. J. Weissgold, A. M. Berrocal, J. T. Flynn, J. B. Starren, M. F. Chiang; Retinopathy of Prematurity Management Using Single-Image vs. Multiple-Image Telemedicine Examinations. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2008;49(13):1389. doi: https://doi.org/.
Download citation file:
© ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)
To compare performance of single-image versus multiple-image telemedicine examinations for diagnosis of retinopathy of prematurity (ROP).
248 eyes from 67 consecutive infants underwent wide-angle retinal imaging by a trained neonatal nurse at 31-33 weeks and/or 35-37 weeks post-menstrual age (PMA) at a single academic institution. Data were uploaded to a web-based telemedicine system and interpreted by three masked retinal specialists. Diagnoses were provided based on single-images, and subsequently on multiple-images, from both eyes of each infant. Findings were compared to a reference standard of indirect ophthalmoscopy by a pediatric ophthalmologist. Primary outcome measures were recommended follow-up interval, presence of plus disease, presence of type-2 prethreshold or worse ROP, and presence of visible peripheral ROP.
Among the three graders, mean sensitivity/specificity for detection of infants requiring follow-up in <1 week were 0.85/0.93 by single-image examination, and 0.91/0.88 by multiple-image examination at 35-37 weeks PMA. Mean sensitivity/specificity for detection of infants with type-2 or worse ROP were 0.82/0.95 by single-image examination, and 1.00/0.87 by multiple-image examination at 35-37 weeks PMA. Mean sensitivity/specificity for detection of plus disease were 1.00/0.86 by single-image examination, and 1.00/0.87 by multiple-image examination at 35-37 weeks PMA. There were no statistically-significant intra-grader differences between single-image and multiple-image telemedicine examinations for detection of plus disease or type-2 or worse ROP.
Single-image telemedicine exam performs comparably to multiple-image examination for detection of clinically-significant ROP. This may have implications for development of screening protocols, particularly in areas with limited access to ophthalmic care.
This PDF is available to Subscribers Only