A comparison of the NCT Reichert R7 with Goldmann applanation tonometry and the Reichert ocular response analyzer

P>Purpose:The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of intraocular pressure (IOP) values from the new non-contact tonometer (NCT) Reichert R7 by comparing results with those from Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT) and the Reichert Ocular Response Analyzer (ORA). Other ocular dimensions were assessed to evaluate their potential influence on the IOP values obtained.Methods:Ninety two right eyes from 92 adults aged between 21 and 59 years (mean 34.9 +/- 11.7 years) were enrolled in this study. IOP was measured with R7, ORA and GAT. All measurements were taken between 14:00 and 16:00 in the afternoon. Corneal resistance factor (CRF) and corneal hysteresis were measured with the Reichert ORA. The spherical equivalent refractive error was obtained using an open field auto-refractor (WAM5500; Grand Seiko) and corneal curvature, anterior chamber depth, corneal diameter and axial length were assessed with an optical coherence biometer (IOL Master; Zeiss Meditec, CA, USA).Results:The mean values for IOP measurements were 15.20 +/- 3.37 mmHg (R7), 13.49 +/- 3.55 mmHg (GAT), 15.01 +/- 3.38 mmHg (ORA IOPcc) and 14.44 +/- 3.47 mmHg (ORA IOPg). With the exception of the CRF (rho = 0.72 p < 0.001) the correlations between ocular parameters and IOP obtained with the R7 were neither statistically nor clinically significant.Conclusions:The new NCT, R7 overestimated the IOP compared with GAT in normal, healthy eyes by about 1.7 mmHg on average (95% confidence range of approximately -2 to +6mmHg). The measures provided by the R7 were significantly influenced by the stiffness of the corneal tissue as measured by the ORA CRF value but not by other dimensional parameters of the eye

Ley de Okun para Andalucía

en este trabajo se ha realizado un análisis de la Ley de Okun para la region de Andalucía, en el que se muestra un análisis econometrico de la causalidad entre las variales desempleo y PIB

Agreement and clinical comparison between a new swept-source optical coherence tomography-based optical biometer and an optical low-coherence reflectometry biometer

Purpose To compare measurements taken using a swept-source optical coherence tomography-based optical biometer (IOLmaster 700) and an optical low-coherence reflectometry biometer (Lenstar 900), and to determine the clinical impacts of differences in their measurements on intraocular lens (IOL) power predictions. Methods Eighty eyes of 80 patients scheduled to undergo cataract surgery were examined with both biometers. The measurements made using each device were axial length (AL), central corneal thickness (CCT), aqueous depth (AQD), lens thickness (LT), mean keratometry (MK), white-to-white distance (WTW), and pupil diameter (PD). Holladay 2 and SRK/T formulas were used to calculate IOL power. Differences in measurement between the two biometers were determined using the paired t-test. Agreement was assessed through intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) and Bland–Altman plots. Results Mean patient age was 76.3±6.8 years (range 59–89). Using the Lenstar, AL and PD could not be measured in 12.5 and 5.25% of eyes, respectively, while IOLMaster 700 took all measurements in all eyes. The variables CCT, AQD, LT, and MK varied significantly between the two biometers. According to ICCs, correlation between measurements made with both devices was excellent except for WTW and PD. Using the SRK/T formula, IOL power prediction based on the data from the two devices were statistically different, but differences were not clinically significant. Conclusions No clinically relevant differences were detected between the biometers in terms of their measurements and IOL power predictions. Using the IOLMaster 700, it was easier to obtain biometric measurements in eyes with less transparent ocular media or longer AL

Effect of pharmacological pupil dilation on measurements and iol power calculation made using the new swept-source optical coherence tomography-based optical biometer

Purpose: to determine whether pupil dilation affects biometric measurements and intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation made using the new swept-source optical coherence tomography-based optical biometer (IOLMaster 700©; Carl Zeiss Meditec, Jena, Germany). Procedures: eighty-one eyes of 81 patients evaluated for cataract surgery were prospectively examined using the IOLMaster 700© before and after pupil dilation with tropicamide 1%. The measurements made were: axial length (AL), central corneal thickness (CCT), aqueous chamber depth (ACD), lens thickness (LT), mean keratometry (MK), white-to-white distance (WTW) and pupil diameter (PD). Holladay II and SRK/T formulas were used to calculate IOL power. Agreement between measurement modes (with and without dilation) was assessed through intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) and Bland-Altman plots. Results: mean patient age was 75.17 ± 7.54 years (range: 57–92). Of the variables determined, CCT, ACD, LT and WTW varied significantly according to pupil dilation. Excellent intraobserver correlation was observed between measurements made before and after pupil dilation. Mean IOL power calculation using the Holladay 2 and SRK/T formulas were unmodified by pupil dilation. Conclusions: the use of pupil dilation produces statistical yet not clinically significant differences in some IOLMaster 700© measurements. However, it does not affect mean IOL power calculation

Diagnostic Ability of Macular Nerve Fiber Layer Thickness Using New Segmentation Software in Glaucoma Suspects

Purpose. To assess the capacity of internal retinal layer thickness measurements made at the macula using new spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (OCT) software to distinguish between healthy subjects and those with suspected glaucoma. The diagnostic performance of such measurements also was compared with that of conventional peripapillary retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) thickness measurements. Methods. The study included 38 subjects with suspected glaucoma and 38 age-matched healthy subjects. In one randomly selected eye of each participant, thickness measurements at the level of the macula were made of the nerve fiber layer (mRNFL), the ganglion cell layer (GCL), and the ganglion cell complex (GCC; GCL + internal plexiform layer) through automated OCT segmentation. Peripapillary RNFL thickness (pRNFL) also was determined using the conventional scan. Results. As the only variable showing intergroup variation, mRNFL in the glaucoma suspects was significantly thinner in the quadrants inner inferior (P = 0.003), inner temporal (P = 0.010), and outer inferior (P = 0.017). The variable best able to discriminate between the two groups was inner inferior mRNFL thickness, as indicated by an area below the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve of 0.742. Conclusions. Macular RNFL thickness measurements showed an improved diagnostic capacity over the other variables examined to distinguish between healthy subjects and glaucoma suspects

Visual outcomes after bilateral trifocal diffractive intraocular lens implantation

Background In recent years new models of intraocular lenses are appearing on the market to reduce requirements for additional optical correction. The purpose of this study is to assess visual outcomes following bilateral cataract surgery and the implant of a FineVision® trifocal intraocular lens (IOL). Methods Prospective, nonrandomized, observational study. Vision was assessed in 44 eyes of 22 patients (mean age 68.4 ± 5.5 years) before and 3 months after surgery. Aberrations were determined using the Topcon KR-1 W wave-front analyzer. LogMAR visual acuity was measured at distance (corrected distance visual acuity, CDVA 4 m), intermediate (distance corrected intermediate visual acuity, DCIVA 60 cm) and near (distance corrected near visual acuity, DCNVA 40 cm). The Pelli-Robson letter chart and the CSV-1000 test were used to estimate contrast sensitivity (CS). Defocus curve testing was performed in photopic and mesopic conditions. Adverse photic phenomena were assessed using the Halo v1.0 program. Results Mean aberration values for a mesopic pupil diameter were: total HOA RMS: 0.41 ± 0.30 μm, coma: 0.32 ± 0.22 μm and spherical aberration: 0.21 ± 0.20 μm. Binocular logMAR measurements were: CDVA −0.05 ± 0.05, DCIVA 0.15 ± 0.10, and DCNVA 0.06 ± 0.10. Mean Pelli-Robson CS was 1.40 ± 0.14 log units. Mean CSV100 CS for the 4 frequencies examined (A: 3 cycles/degree (cpd), B: 6 cpd, C: 12 cpd, D: 18 cpd) were 1.64 ± 0.14, 1.77 ± 0.18, 1.44 ± 0.24 and 0.98 ± 0.24 log units, respectively. Significant differences were observed in defocus curves for photopic and mesopic conditions (p < 0.0001). A mean disturbance index of 0.28 ± 0.22 was obtained. Conclusions Bilateral FineVision IOL implant achieved a full range of adequate vision, satisfactory contrast sensitivity, and a lack of significant adverse photic phenomena. Trial registration Eudract Clinical Trials Registry Number: 2014-003266-2

A Diagnostic Calculator for Detecting Glaucoma on the Basis of Retinal Nerve Fiber Layer, Optic Disc, and Retinal Ganglion Cell Analysis by Optical Coherence Tomography

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to develop and validate a multivariate predictive model to detect glaucoma by using a combination of retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL), retinal ganglion cell-inner plexiform (GCIPL), and optic disc parameters measured using spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (OCT). Methods: Five hundred eyes from 500 participants and 187 eyes of another 187 participants were included in the study and validation groups, respectively. Patients with glaucoma were classified in five groups based on visual field damage. Sensitivity and specificity of all glaucoma OCT parameters were analyzed. Receiver operating characteristic curves (ROC) and areas under the ROC (AUC) were compared. Three predictive multivariate models (quantitative, qualitative, and combined) that used a combination of the best OCT parameters were constructed. A diagnostic calculator was created using the combined multivariate model. Results: The best AUC parameters were: inferior RNFL, average RNFL, vertical cup/disc ratio, minimal GCIPL, and inferior-temporal GCIPL. Comparisons among the parameters did not show that the GCIPL parameters were better than those of the RNFL in early and advanced glaucoma. The highest AUC was in the combined predictive model (0.937; 95% confidence interval, 0.911–0.957) and was significantly (P = 0.0001) higher than the other isolated parameters considered in early and advanced glaucoma. The validation group displayed similar results to those of the study group. Conclusions: Best GCIPL, RNFL, and optic disc parameters showed a similar ability to detect glaucoma. The combined predictive formula improved the glaucoma detection compared to the best isolated parameters evaluated. The diagnostic calculator obtained good classification from participants in both the study and validation groups

Anatomical characterization of central, apical and minimal corneal thickness

<b>AIM:</b> To anatomically locate the points of minimum corneal thickness and central corneal thickness (pupil center) in relation to the corneal apex.<b>METHODS:</b> Observational, cross-sectional study, 299 healthy volunteers. Thickness at the corneal apex (AT), minimum corneal thickness (MT) and corneal thickness at the pupil center (PT) were determined using the pentacam. Distances from the corneal apex to MT (MD) and PT (PD) were calculated and their quadrant position (taking the corneal apex as the reference) determined:point of minimum thickness (MC) and point of central thickness (PC) depending on the quadrant position. Two multivariate linear regression models were constructed to examine the influence of age, gender, power of the flattest and steepest corneal axes, position of the flattest axis, corneal volume (determined using the Pentacam) and PT on MD and PD. The effects of these variables on MC and PC were also determined in two multinomial regression models.<b>RESULTS:</b> MT was located at a mean distance of 0.909 mm from the apex (79.4% in the inferior-temporal quadrant). PT was located at a mean distance of 0.156 mm from the apex. The linear regression model for MD indicated it was significantly influenced by corneal volume (B=-0.024; 95%CI:-0.043 to -0.004). No significant relations were identified in the linear regression model for PD or the multinomial logistic regressions for MC and PC.<b>CONCLUSION:</b> MT was typically located at the inferior-temporal quadrant of the cornea and its distance to the corneal apex tended to decrease with the increment of corneal volume

Technical Note: A comparison of central and peripheral intraocular pressure using rebound tonometry

Purpose: To compare central and peripheral intraocular pressure (IOP) readings obtained with rebound tonometry.Methods: Intraocular pressure was measured on the right eye of 153 patients (65 males, 88 females), aged from 21 to 85 years (mean +/- S.D., 55.5 +/- 15.2 years) with the ICare rebound tonometer at centre, and 2 mm from the limbus (in the nasal and temporal regions along the 0-180O corneal meridian).Results: Intraocular pressure values obtained with the ICare were 14.9 +/- 2.8; 14.1 +/- 2.5 and 14.5 +/- 2.7 mmHg at centre, nasal and temporal corneal locations, respectively. On average, nasal and temporal IOP readings were 0.75 and 0.37 mmHg lower than the central reading (p 0.05, respectively). A highly significant correlation was found between central and peripheral measurements in nasal (r(2) = 0.905; p < 0.001) and temporal (r(2) = 0.879; p < 0.001) regions along the horizontal meridian. Almost 80% of patients presented nasal IOP values within +/- 1 mmHg of the central value.Conclusions: Intraocular pressure values measured with the ICare (R) rebound tonometer on the nasal corneal region is slightly lower on average and highly correlated with IOP values recorded at corneal centre. Both nasal and temporal readings are in good agreement with central IOP, and could be used to obtain a reliable estimate of rebound IOP in corneas where central readings cannot be taken.- (undefined

Handbook for Moving towards Multiprofessional Work

This handbook was supposed to be a choral artwork and the result is a very choral and artistic patchwork. In the process of building up the project ‘MOMU – Moving towards Multiprofessional Work’, we sewed, we combined patterns to define new ones. We knew our shapes were different as were our fabrics but we learned to measure and cut in order to create a larger design. The results of this is what you can see in this handbook. We hope you’ll agree that the whole is greater than the sum of the parts. It has not been easy to piece this together. These types of processes bring with them discussions, arguments, discoveries, hopes, despair and bureaucratic requirements; all inevitable parts of such a complex process. However, it is honest to say that the process has been exciting and paves the way for future and productive collaborations. Along the way some of the participants left us: Carola Boehm and Esther Mercado; some others joined us: Pedro de la Paz. Some changes took place in our universities, new roles were assumed. This is also part of the richness of the tapestry. We are very thankful to all of them for their contribution. We thank the European Union for funding this project. For all of us it was the first time we had developed an Erasmus+ KA2 project and we had to apply the ‘learning by doing formula’, but we managed. We are very thankful to teachers who volunteered to participate in the training sessions, to practitioners who gave us important input and feedback and showed us how to improve and make our teaching more practical. Thanks also to our national steering groups for their clarity and recommendations. Importantly, our gratitude extends to our students: social work and art students, who were open to new perspectives and ways of exploring their place in the world and the job market. Youth unemployment in Europe continues to be an issue, but projects like MOMU aim to address this challenge in creative ways. However, we are at the very starting point and further steps are needed to make the new competence framework we have created a reality. This handbook intends to suggest and inspire instead of guiding the reader. It offers training packages to be adapted depending on contexts, whilst highlighting our successes and failures. We suggest it is read, considered and adapted. In other words, each person willing to put it into practice will have to assume that they will have to make their own patchwork