使用重复使用的 iCare 探头进行眼压测量准确性对比分析。

IF 2.8 Q1 OPHTHALMOLOGY Ophthalmology. Glaucoma Pub Date : 2024-07-01 DOI:10.1016/j.ogla.2024.02.005
{"title":"使用重复使用的 iCare 探头进行眼压测量准确性对比分析。","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.ogla.2024.02.005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><p>To assess the accuracy of reused iCare probes after disinfection with 70% isopropyl alcohol and ethylene oxide gas compared to new iCare probes and Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT).</p></div><div><h3>Design</h3><p>Prospective comparative analysis.</p></div><div><h3>Participants</h3><p>A total of 118 eyes from 59 patients recruited from the Aravind Eye Hospital glaucoma clinic in Tirupati, South India.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Intraocular pressure (IOP) was measured on each eye using a new iCare tonometer probe, an iCare probe previously used and disinfected 1 time prior (once used probe) and 5 times prior (multiply used probe), as well as with GAT. Probes were disinfected after each use with 70% isopropyl alcohol swabs and ethylene oxide sterilization.</p></div><div><h3>Main Outcome Measures</h3><p>Agreement demonstrated with intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs), mean difference in IOP values with limits of agreement, and Bland-Altman plots among IOP measurement approaches.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Compared to new iCare probes, both once used probes (ICC = 0.989, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.985–0.993) and multiply used probes (ICC = 0.989, 95% CI 0.984–0.992) showed excellent agreement, and the mean difference in IOP was minimal for both once used probes (0.70 mmHg, 95% CI 0.29–1.11) and multiply used probes (0.75 mmHg, 95% CI 0.66–0.82) compared to new probes. Bland-Altman plots demonstrated minimal differences between new and reused probes across the spectrum of IOP. When comparing multiply used probes to once used probes, there was a high level of agreement (0.993) (95% CI 0.990–0.995) and negligible mean IOP difference 0.04 mmHg (95% CI 0.32–0.40). Additionally, ICC values for new probes (0.966, 95% CI 0.951–0.976), once used probes (0.958, 95% CI 0.940–0.971), and multiply used probes (0.957, 95% CI 0.938–0.970) compared to GAT were similar and all showed excellent agreement. Both new and reused iCare probes underestimated IOP by 2 to 3 mmHg compared to GAT.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>In this prospective comparative analysis, we found that reusing iCare probes up to 5 times does not compromise the accuracy of IOP measurements when disinfected with 70% isopropyl alcohol swabs and ethylene oxide. Reusing iCare probes has the potential to transform care by reducing cost, decreasing environmental waste, and allowing for glaucoma screening camps and increased glaucoma monitoring in low resource settings leading to earlier identification and treatment of glaucoma.</p></div><div><h3>Financial Disclosure(s)</h3><p>Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":19519,"journal":{"name":"Ophthalmology. Glaucoma","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Comparative Analysis of Intraocular Pressure Measurement Accuracy With Reused iCare Probes\",\"authors\":\"\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ogla.2024.02.005\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><p>To assess the accuracy of reused iCare probes after disinfection with 70% isopropyl alcohol and ethylene oxide gas compared to new iCare probes and Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT).</p></div><div><h3>Design</h3><p>Prospective comparative analysis.</p></div><div><h3>Participants</h3><p>A total of 118 eyes from 59 patients recruited from the Aravind Eye Hospital glaucoma clinic in Tirupati, South India.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Intraocular pressure (IOP) was measured on each eye using a new iCare tonometer probe, an iCare probe previously used and disinfected 1 time prior (once used probe) and 5 times prior (multiply used probe), as well as with GAT. Probes were disinfected after each use with 70% isopropyl alcohol swabs and ethylene oxide sterilization.</p></div><div><h3>Main Outcome Measures</h3><p>Agreement demonstrated with intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs), mean difference in IOP values with limits of agreement, and Bland-Altman plots among IOP measurement approaches.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Compared to new iCare probes, both once used probes (ICC = 0.989, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.985–0.993) and multiply used probes (ICC = 0.989, 95% CI 0.984–0.992) showed excellent agreement, and the mean difference in IOP was minimal for both once used probes (0.70 mmHg, 95% CI 0.29–1.11) and multiply used probes (0.75 mmHg, 95% CI 0.66–0.82) compared to new probes. Bland-Altman plots demonstrated minimal differences between new and reused probes across the spectrum of IOP. When comparing multiply used probes to once used probes, there was a high level of agreement (0.993) (95% CI 0.990–0.995) and negligible mean IOP difference 0.04 mmHg (95% CI 0.32–0.40). Additionally, ICC values for new probes (0.966, 95% CI 0.951–0.976), once used probes (0.958, 95% CI 0.940–0.971), and multiply used probes (0.957, 95% CI 0.938–0.970) compared to GAT were similar and all showed excellent agreement. Both new and reused iCare probes underestimated IOP by 2 to 3 mmHg compared to GAT.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>In this prospective comparative analysis, we found that reusing iCare probes up to 5 times does not compromise the accuracy of IOP measurements when disinfected with 70% isopropyl alcohol swabs and ethylene oxide. Reusing iCare probes has the potential to transform care by reducing cost, decreasing environmental waste, and allowing for glaucoma screening camps and increased glaucoma monitoring in low resource settings leading to earlier identification and treatment of glaucoma.</p></div><div><h3>Financial Disclosure(s)</h3><p>Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19519,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ophthalmology. Glaucoma\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ophthalmology. Glaucoma\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589419624000322\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"OPHTHALMOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ophthalmology. Glaucoma","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589419624000322","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的评估经 70% 异丙醇和乙二醇消毒后重复使用的 iCare 探针与新 iCare 探针和戈德曼眼压计 (GAT) 相比的准确性:前瞻性比较分析 参与者:从印度南部蒂鲁帕蒂的 Aravind 眼科医院青光眼诊所招募的 59 名患者的 118 只眼睛:使用新的 iCare 眼压计探头、之前使用过并消毒过一次(使用过一次的探头)和五次(使用过多次的探头)的 iCare 探头以及 GAT 测量每只眼睛的眼压。探针每次使用后都用 70% 异丙醇棉签消毒,并用环氧乙烷灭菌:主要结果测量:通过类内相关系数(ICC)、眼压值的平均差异与一致性极限以及眼压测量方法之间的布兰-阿尔特曼图显示一致性:与新的 iCare 探头相比,一次性使用的探头(ICC=0.989,95%CI 0.985-0.993)和多次使用的探头(ICC=0.989,95%CI 0.984-0.992)显示出极好的一致性,与新探头相比,一次性使用的探头(0.70 mmHg,95%CI 0.29-1.11)和多次使用的探头(0.75 mmHg,95%CI 0.66-0.82)的眼压平均差极小。Bland-Altman 图显示,在整个 IOP 范围内,新探针和重复使用探针之间的差异极小。在比较多次使用的探针和一次使用的探针时,两者的一致性很高(0.993(95%CI 0.990-0.995)),平均 IOP 差异为 0.04 mmHg(95%CI -0.32-0.40),可以忽略不计。此外,与 GAT 相比,新探针(0.966,95%CI 0.951-0.976)、使用过一次的探针(0.958,95%CI 0.940-0.971)和多次使用的探针(0.957,95%CI 0.938-0.970)的 ICC 值相似,都显示出极好的一致性。与 GAT 相比,新的和重复使用的 iCare 探头都低估了 2-3 mmHg 的眼压:在这项前瞻性比较分析中,我们发现重复使用 iCare 探头多达五次并不会影响用 70% 异丙醇棉签和环氧乙烷消毒后测量眼压的准确性。重复使用 iCare 探头有可能通过降低成本、减少环境废物、在资源匮乏的环境中开展青光眼筛查营和增加青光眼监测来改变医疗服务,从而尽早发现和治疗青光眼。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
A Comparative Analysis of Intraocular Pressure Measurement Accuracy With Reused iCare Probes

Purpose

To assess the accuracy of reused iCare probes after disinfection with 70% isopropyl alcohol and ethylene oxide gas compared to new iCare probes and Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT).

Design

Prospective comparative analysis.

Participants

A total of 118 eyes from 59 patients recruited from the Aravind Eye Hospital glaucoma clinic in Tirupati, South India.

Methods

Intraocular pressure (IOP) was measured on each eye using a new iCare tonometer probe, an iCare probe previously used and disinfected 1 time prior (once used probe) and 5 times prior (multiply used probe), as well as with GAT. Probes were disinfected after each use with 70% isopropyl alcohol swabs and ethylene oxide sterilization.

Main Outcome Measures

Agreement demonstrated with intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs), mean difference in IOP values with limits of agreement, and Bland-Altman plots among IOP measurement approaches.

Results

Compared to new iCare probes, both once used probes (ICC = 0.989, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.985–0.993) and multiply used probes (ICC = 0.989, 95% CI 0.984–0.992) showed excellent agreement, and the mean difference in IOP was minimal for both once used probes (0.70 mmHg, 95% CI 0.29–1.11) and multiply used probes (0.75 mmHg, 95% CI 0.66–0.82) compared to new probes. Bland-Altman plots demonstrated minimal differences between new and reused probes across the spectrum of IOP. When comparing multiply used probes to once used probes, there was a high level of agreement (0.993) (95% CI 0.990–0.995) and negligible mean IOP difference 0.04 mmHg (95% CI 0.32–0.40). Additionally, ICC values for new probes (0.966, 95% CI 0.951–0.976), once used probes (0.958, 95% CI 0.940–0.971), and multiply used probes (0.957, 95% CI 0.938–0.970) compared to GAT were similar and all showed excellent agreement. Both new and reused iCare probes underestimated IOP by 2 to 3 mmHg compared to GAT.

Conclusions

In this prospective comparative analysis, we found that reusing iCare probes up to 5 times does not compromise the accuracy of IOP measurements when disinfected with 70% isopropyl alcohol swabs and ethylene oxide. Reusing iCare probes has the potential to transform care by reducing cost, decreasing environmental waste, and allowing for glaucoma screening camps and increased glaucoma monitoring in low resource settings leading to earlier identification and treatment of glaucoma.

Financial Disclosure(s)

Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Ophthalmology. Glaucoma
Ophthalmology. Glaucoma OPHTHALMOLOGY-
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
6.90%
发文量
140
审稿时长
46 days
期刊最新文献
Contents Editorial Board Advanced Imaging in Traumatic Glaucoma: Detection of Intralenticular Foreign Body Starstruck Lens: Iatrogenic Rosette Cataract and Its Spontaneous Resolution Unusual Posterior Capsular Pigmentation in Axenfeld–Rieger Anomaly
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1