Comparison of subjective grading and objective assessment in meibography |
| |
| Affiliation: | 1. Dr. Heiko Pult – Optometry and Vision Research, Weinheim, Germany;2. Contact Lens & Anterior Eye Research Unit (CLAER), School of Optometry and Vision Sciences, Cardiff University, UK;3. School of Optometry and Vision Sciences, Cardiff University, UK;1. Department of Ophthalmology, New Zealand National Eye Centre, The University of Auckland, New Zealand;2. Department of Optometry and Vision Science, New Zealand National Eye Centre, The University of Auckland, New Zealand;2. Department of Ophthalmology, Severance Hospital, Institute of Vision Research, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul;3. Yonsei University Graduate School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.;1. Department of Convergence Medical Science, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, South Korea;2. Department of Ophthalmology, Yeouido St. Mary''s Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, South Korea;3. Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Science, Seoul St. Mary''s Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, South Korea;4. School of Information and Communication, Gwangju Institute of Science and Technology, Gwangju, South Korea;5. Flaum Eye Institute, The Institute of Optics, Center for Visual Science, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY;6. Advanced Photonics Research Institute, Gwangju Institute of Science and Technology, Gwangju, South Korea;1. Department of Ophthalmology, Yonghe Cardinal Tien Hospital, New Taipei City, Taiwan;2. Department of Ophthalmology, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan;3. Department of Family Medicine, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan;4. Department of Internal Medicine, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan;5. Graduate Institute of Clinical Medicine, College of Medicine, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan |
| |
| Abstract: | AimTo analyse repeatability of subjective grading and objective assessment in non-contact infra-red meibography.MethodsMeibography photographs of 24 subjects (female 14; mean age = 46; range = 19–69 years, upper-lid images = 12, lower-lid images = 12) were classified in two sessions by three experienced observers (OI, OII, OIII). Relative area or portion affected by meibomian glands (MG) loss was classified applying three different grading scales in randomized order: a four-grade scale (4S) (degree 0 = no partial glands; 1 = <25% partial glands; 3 = 25–75% partial glands; 3 = >75% partial glands), a pictorial five-grade scale (5S) (degree 0 = no meibomian gland loss (MGL); 1 = <25% MGL; 3 = 26–50% MGL; 3 = 51–75%; 4 = >75% MGL) and objectively by a 100-grade scale (DA) applying ImageJ software.ResultsObserved MG loss ranged from 0% to 69%. Intra-observer agreement of the 5S (OI: κ = 0.80, p < 0.001; OII: κ = 0.40, p = 0.009; OIII κ = 0.81, p < 0.001) was better than of the 4S (OI: κ = 0.79, p < 0.001; OII: κ = 0.15, p = 0.342; OIII κ = 0.50, p = 0.0071). Intra-observer agreement of OI and OIII (±0.88 (95% confidence interval), ±1.305) was better than of OII (±2.21) in 4S and 5S (±0.99, ±2.00 and ±0.91; OI, OII and OIII, respectively) while it was relatively similar in DA (±18, ±17 and ±17). Inter-observer agreement was better in DA (OI–OII: ±13, OI–OII: ±19, OII–OIII: ±26) than in 4S (OI–OII: ±1.76; OI–OIII: ±1.29 and OII–OIII: ±1.31) or 5S (OI–OII: ±1.49; OI–OIII: ±0.91 and OII–OIII: ±1.20).ConclusionIntra-observer and inter-observer agreement was better in computerized grading followed by the subjective five-grade scale and four-grade scale. |
| |
| Keywords: | |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
