Comparative Evaluation of Fundus Image Interpretation Accuracy in Glaucoma Screening Among Different Physician Groups

To examine the variability in glaucoma screening using fundus images among physicians, including non-ophthalmologists. Sixty-nine eyes from 69 patients, including 25 eyes with glaucoma, were included from the Jikei University Hospital from July 2019 to December 2022. Fundus images were captured usin...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) N.Z.), 2024-01, Vol.18, p.583-589
Main Authors: Wada-Koike, Chiharu, Terauchi, Ryo, Fukai, Kota, Sano, Kei, Nishijima, Euido, Komatsu, Koji, Ito, Kyoko, Kato, Tomohiro, Tatemichi, Masayuki, Kabata, Yoshiaki, Nakano, Tadashi
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
fundus images
Glaucoma
health checkup
Instrument industry
Medical colleges
Ophthalmology
sensitivity
specificity
Citations: Items that this one cites
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:To examine the variability in glaucoma screening using fundus images among physicians, including non-ophthalmologists. Sixty-nine eyes from 69 patients, including 25 eyes with glaucoma, were included from the Jikei University Hospital from July 2019 to December 2022. Fundus images were captured using TRC-NW8 (Topcon Corporation, Tokyo, Japan), and were interpreted by 10 non-ophthalmologists, 10 non-specialist ophthalmologists, and 9 specialists for diagnostic accuracy. We analyzed differences in diagnostic accuracy among the three groups. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and Kappa coefficient were compared, using the Kruskal-Wallis test followed by a post hoc Dunn's test. The sensitivity and specificity were 0.22 and 0.92 for non-ophthalmologists, 0.49 and 0.83 for non-specialist ophthalmologists, and 0.68 and 0.87 for specialists, respectively. Both specialists and non-specialist ophthalmologists showed significantly higher sensitivity than non-ophthalmologists (Dunn's test, P
ISSN:1177-5467
1177-5483
1177-5483
DOI:10.2147/OPTH.S453663