The evaluation of a novel tool to remotely assess visual acuity in chronic uveitis patients during the COVID-19 pandemic
Claessens, J. L.; van Egmond, J.; de Boer, J. H.; Wisse, R. P. L.
Show abstract
BackgroundRestrictions due to the recent COVID-19 pandemic catalysed the deployment of telehealth solutions. A novel web-based visual acuity test, validated in a healthy population, may be of great value in the follow-up of uveitis patients. ObjectiveTo determine the measurement accuracy of the unsupervised remote Easee web-based visual acuity test in uveitis patients, when compared to a conventional in-hospital assessment. MethodsCross-sectional diagnostic accuracy study. Between April 2020 and September 2020, consecutive adult uveitis patients were invited for the web-based visual acuity test (index test) within two weeks prior to their conventional in-hospital assessment (reference test). ResultsA total of 269 patients were invited by mail, of whom 84 visited the website (31%). Ultimately 98 eyes met the criteria for statistical analysis. The mean difference between the two tests was low and non-significant: 0.02 logMAR (SD 0.12, P = 0.085). The 95% limits of agreement ranged from -0.21 to 0.26 logMAR. No relevant differences were identified in clinical characteristics between subgroups with a good performance (i.e. difference between the tests 0.15 logMAR) or underperformance (i.e. difference >0.15 logMAR) on the web-based test. ConclusionThe web-based visual acuity test is a promising tool to remotely assess visual acuity in the majority of uveitis patients, especially relevant when access to ophthalmic care is limited. No association between patient- or uveitis-related variables and (under)performance of the test were identified. These outcomes underline the potential of remote vision testing in other common ophthalmic conditions. A proper implementation of this web-based tool in health care could be of great value for revolutionizing teleconsultations.
Matching journals
The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Visual field evaluation using Zippy Adaptive Threshold Algorithm (ZATA) Standard and ZATA Fast in patients with glaucoma and healthy individuals 96%
- Relating Standardized Automated Perimetry Performed with Stimulus Sizes III and V in Eyes With Field Loss due to Glaucoma and NAION 95%
- The learning curve of murine subretinal injection among clinically trained ophthalmic surgeons 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- The evaluation of a web‐based tool for measuring the uncorrected visual acuity and refractive error in keratoconus eyes: a prospective open‐label method comparison study 98%
- Automated 360-degree goniophotography with the NIDEK Gonioscope GS-1 for glaucoma 96%
- Factors predicting the visual outcome of intracorneal ring segment for keratoconus 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Risk Model for Intraoperative Complication during Cataract Surgery Based on Data from 900,000 Eyes – Previous Intravitreal Injection is a Risk Factor 96%
- Automated Expert-level Scleral Spur Detection and Quantitative Biometric Analysis on the ANTERION Anterior Segment OCT System 95%
- Macula structural and vascular differences in glaucoma eyes with and without high axial myopia 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Automated vision screening of children using a mobile graphic device 96%
- Increasing frequency of hospital admissions for retinal detachment and vitreo-retinal surgery in England 2000-2018 94%
- Evaluation of OCT biomarker changes in treatment-naive neovascular AMD using a deep semantic segmentation algorithm 94%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.