Morphometric Optic Nerve Head Analysis in Glaucoma Patients: A Comparison between the Simultaneous Nonmydriatic Stereoscopic Fundus Camera (Kowa Nonmyd WX3D) and the Heidelberg Scanning Laser Ophthalmoscope (HRT III)

Purpose. To investigate the agreement between morphometric optic nerve head parameters assessed with the confocal laser ophthalmoscope HRT III and the stereoscopic fundus camera Kowa nonmyd WX3D retrospectively. Methods. Morphometric optic nerve head parameters of 40 eyes of 40 patients with primary open angle glaucoma were analyzed regarding their vertical cup-to-disc-ratio (CDR). Vertical CDR, disc area, cup volume, rim volume, and maximum cup depth were assessed with both devices by one examiner. Mean bias and limits of agreement (95% CI) were obtained using scatter plots and Bland-Altman analysis. Results. Overall vertical CDR comparison between HRT III and Kowa nonmyd WX3D measurements showed a mean difference (limits of agreement) of −0.06 (−0.36 to 0.24). For the CDR < 0.5 group (n=24) mean difference in vertical CDR was −0.14 (−0.34 to 0.06) and for the CDR ≥ 0.5 group (n=16) 0.06 (−0.21 to 0.34). Conclusion. This study showed a good agreement between Kowa nonmyd WX3D and HRT III with regard to widely used optic nerve head parameters in patients with glaucomatous optic neuropathy. However, data from Kowa nonmyd WX3D exhibited the tendency to measure larger CDR values than HRT III in the group with CDR < 0.5 group and lower CDR values in the group with CDR ≥ 0.5

Feasibility of monitoring compliance with intermittent occlusion therapy glasses for amblyopia treatment

Background Liquid crystal glasses use an intermittent occlusion technique and may improve compliance compared to adhesive patches. Previous studies support the effectiveness of intermittent occlusion therapy (IO therapy) glasses for amblyopia treatment. However, objective compliance for these glasses has not been measured. The purpose of this study was to investigate the feasibility of using a microsensor to monitor objective compliance with IO therapy glasses. Methods Children 3 to ≤8 years of age with unilateral amblyopia were enrolled. All subjects had optimal refractive correction (if needed) for at least 5 weeks without improvement. Subjects were prescribed IO therapy glasses, set at 30-second opaque/transparent intervals (ie, occluded 50% of wear time). Wear time was prescribed according to amblyopia severity. For each patient, objective compliance with the IO therapy glasses was monitored by means of a microsensor. Results A total of 13 subjects returned with microsensor data. Compliance varied among and within individuals. General compliance averaged 51.6% (range, 10%-97%). Mean daily compliance decreased slightly over time. On average, patients’ visual acuity improved 0.14 ± 0.15 logMAR (range, −0.1 to 0.5 logMAR). No parents reported that their child had social concerns related to the attached microsensor. Conclusions Objective compliance with IO therapy glasses can be monitored by a simple microsensor reliably. In our study cohort, objective compliance with IO therapy glasses varied among individuals, but on average it declined slightly over time

Web-based telemonitoring of visual function and self-reported postoperative outcomes in cataract care: international multicenter randomized controlled trial

Purpose: To compare web-based, self-administered follow-up after cataract surgery to conventional face-to-face follow-up. Setting: Eye clinics in the Netherlands, Austria, and Germany. Design: Randomized controlled trial with an embedded method comparison study (ClinicalTrials. gov: NCT04809402). Methods: Routine patients with cataract were randomized into 2 groups: The telemonitoring group undertook web-based vision self-assessments and questionnaires from home, while the usual care group received conventional care. All participants had a 4- to 6-week postoperative clinic visit for safety and validation purposes. Outcomes included, the web test's accuracy for assessing postoperative visual acuity (VA) and refractive error, adverse event rates, and patient-reported outcome measurements (PROMs). Results: 94 participants (188 eyes) were enrolled. Web-based uncorrected distance VA testing demonstrated a negligible mean difference (-0.03 ± 0.14 logMAR) when compared with conventional Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study chart testing, with 95% limits of agreement ranging from -0.30 to 0.24 logMAR. The web-based refraction assessment overestimated the postoperative refractive error (mean difference in spherical equivalent 0.15 ± 0.67 diopters), resulting in a poorer corrected distance VA compared with subjective refraction (mean 0.1 vs -0.1 logMAR). Rates of adverse events and unscheduled consultations were minimal across both groups. Preoperative and postoperative PROM questionnaires had a 100% response rate. Visual functioning (Catquest-9SF and National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire-25) improved postoperatively (mean improvement -0.80 and 16.70, respectively) and did not significantly differ between the 2 groups. Conclusions: The patients with cataract in this study effectively provided postoperative outcome data using a web interface. Both conventional and web-based follow-ups yielded similar PROMs and adverse event rates. Future developments should reduce the variability in the web-based VA test and yield representative refraction outcomes