Cargando…

Ophthalmologists on Smartphones: Image-Based Teleconsultation

BACKGROUND: Teleophthalmology has the potential to facilitate wider access to expert advice. It includes viewing of ophthalmic images by experts either on handheld devices like smartphones/tablets or office devices such as computer screens. However, to ensure rapid feedback, the turnaround time of a...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Mohan, Amit, Kaur, Navjot, Sharma, Vinod, Sen, Pradhnya, Jain, Elesh, Gajraj, Manju
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: White Rose University Press 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7510393/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32999968
http://dx.doi.org/10.22599/bioj.118
_version_ 1783585776739549184
author Mohan, Amit
Kaur, Navjot
Sharma, Vinod
Sen, Pradhnya
Jain, Elesh
Gajraj, Manju
author_facet Mohan, Amit
Kaur, Navjot
Sharma, Vinod
Sen, Pradhnya
Jain, Elesh
Gajraj, Manju
author_sort Mohan, Amit
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Teleophthalmology has the potential to facilitate wider access to expert advice. It includes viewing of ophthalmic images by experts either on handheld devices like smartphones/tablets or office devices such as computer screens. However, to ensure rapid feedback, the turnaround time of any consultation must be kept to a minimum which requires use of handheld user-friendly devices. The purpose of this study was to assess whether images of different eye ailments viewed on smartphones and tablets are of comparable subjective quality as those viewed on a computer screen. METHODS: This was a prospective study comparing the subjective quality of images on a smartphone, tablet and computer screen. Thirty images were analysed – 10 of extraocular morphology, 10 of the anterior segment pathology and 10 of retinal diseases. Ten ophthalmologists participated and were instructed to rate the overall quality of each image on a 7-point Likert scale (terrible-1, poor-2, average-3, fair-4, good-5, very good-6, excellent-7). RESULTS: Overall smartphones were found to have higher ratings of subjective image quality (5.9 ± 0.48) than images displayed on tablets (5.13 ± 0.51) and computers (5.0 ± 0.37). The images were rated ‘good’ or ‘very good’ in all (100%) of the smartphone images. Fundus images and extraocular images were rated higher than anterior segment images on the smartphone. When comparing the two handheld devices with computers, both smartphones and tablets had similar image quality (p > 0.05, not significant) to computer images. However, for extraocular diseases, smartphone (6.1 ± 0.32) had significantly better image quality and images were easier to interpret compared to images on the computer (p < 0.05). Smartphones were rated ‘very good’ in 88.33% cases. All consultants (n = 10) were comfortable with the use of smartphone images and were already using it for teleconsultation at least three times in a month. Vision technicians reported minimum delay in getting advice when sending the images on mobile application to expert ophthalmologists. CONCLUSION: Smartphones can be used for teleconsultation. Subjective qualities of ophthalmic images on a smartphone are similar to those on tablets and computers. For rural communities that rely on teleconsultation, this small study provides useful evidence which may support the use of smartphones, tablets or computers for viewing ophthalmic images.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7510393
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher White Rose University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-75103932020-09-29 Ophthalmologists on Smartphones: Image-Based Teleconsultation Mohan, Amit Kaur, Navjot Sharma, Vinod Sen, Pradhnya Jain, Elesh Gajraj, Manju Br Ir Orthopt J Original Article BACKGROUND: Teleophthalmology has the potential to facilitate wider access to expert advice. It includes viewing of ophthalmic images by experts either on handheld devices like smartphones/tablets or office devices such as computer screens. However, to ensure rapid feedback, the turnaround time of any consultation must be kept to a minimum which requires use of handheld user-friendly devices. The purpose of this study was to assess whether images of different eye ailments viewed on smartphones and tablets are of comparable subjective quality as those viewed on a computer screen. METHODS: This was a prospective study comparing the subjective quality of images on a smartphone, tablet and computer screen. Thirty images were analysed – 10 of extraocular morphology, 10 of the anterior segment pathology and 10 of retinal diseases. Ten ophthalmologists participated and were instructed to rate the overall quality of each image on a 7-point Likert scale (terrible-1, poor-2, average-3, fair-4, good-5, very good-6, excellent-7). RESULTS: Overall smartphones were found to have higher ratings of subjective image quality (5.9 ± 0.48) than images displayed on tablets (5.13 ± 0.51) and computers (5.0 ± 0.37). The images were rated ‘good’ or ‘very good’ in all (100%) of the smartphone images. Fundus images and extraocular images were rated higher than anterior segment images on the smartphone. When comparing the two handheld devices with computers, both smartphones and tablets had similar image quality (p > 0.05, not significant) to computer images. However, for extraocular diseases, smartphone (6.1 ± 0.32) had significantly better image quality and images were easier to interpret compared to images on the computer (p < 0.05). Smartphones were rated ‘very good’ in 88.33% cases. All consultants (n = 10) were comfortable with the use of smartphone images and were already using it for teleconsultation at least three times in a month. Vision technicians reported minimum delay in getting advice when sending the images on mobile application to expert ophthalmologists. CONCLUSION: Smartphones can be used for teleconsultation. Subjective qualities of ophthalmic images on a smartphone are similar to those on tablets and computers. For rural communities that rely on teleconsultation, this small study provides useful evidence which may support the use of smartphones, tablets or computers for viewing ophthalmic images. White Rose University Press 2019-01-09 /pmc/articles/PMC7510393/ /pubmed/32999968 http://dx.doi.org/10.22599/bioj.118 Text en Copyright: © 2019 The Author(s) http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC-BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. See http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
spellingShingle Original Article
Mohan, Amit
Kaur, Navjot
Sharma, Vinod
Sen, Pradhnya
Jain, Elesh
Gajraj, Manju
Ophthalmologists on Smartphones: Image-Based Teleconsultation
title Ophthalmologists on Smartphones: Image-Based Teleconsultation
title_full Ophthalmologists on Smartphones: Image-Based Teleconsultation
title_fullStr Ophthalmologists on Smartphones: Image-Based Teleconsultation
title_full_unstemmed Ophthalmologists on Smartphones: Image-Based Teleconsultation
title_short Ophthalmologists on Smartphones: Image-Based Teleconsultation
title_sort ophthalmologists on smartphones: image-based teleconsultation
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7510393/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32999968
http://dx.doi.org/10.22599/bioj.118
work_keys_str_mv AT mohanamit ophthalmologistsonsmartphonesimagebasedteleconsultation
AT kaurnavjot ophthalmologistsonsmartphonesimagebasedteleconsultation
AT sharmavinod ophthalmologistsonsmartphonesimagebasedteleconsultation
AT senpradhnya ophthalmologistsonsmartphonesimagebasedteleconsultation
AT jainelesh ophthalmologistsonsmartphonesimagebasedteleconsultation
AT gajrajmanju ophthalmologistsonsmartphonesimagebasedteleconsultation