Cargando…

Smartphone Slit Lamp Imaging—Usability and Quality Assessment

Purpose: To assess the usability and image quality of a smartphone adapter for direct slit lamp imaging. Methods: A single-center, prospective, clinical study conducted in the Department of Ophthalmology at the University Hospital Zurich, Switzerland. The smartphone group consisted of 26 medical sta...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Muth, Daniel Rudolf, Blaser, Frank, Foa, Nastasia, Scherm, Pauline, Mayer, Wolfgang Johann, Barthelmes, Daniel, Zweifel, Sandrine Anne
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9913954/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36766528
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics13030423
_version_ 1784885550523613184
author Muth, Daniel Rudolf
Blaser, Frank
Foa, Nastasia
Scherm, Pauline
Mayer, Wolfgang Johann
Barthelmes, Daniel
Zweifel, Sandrine Anne
author_facet Muth, Daniel Rudolf
Blaser, Frank
Foa, Nastasia
Scherm, Pauline
Mayer, Wolfgang Johann
Barthelmes, Daniel
Zweifel, Sandrine Anne
author_sort Muth, Daniel Rudolf
collection PubMed
description Purpose: To assess the usability and image quality of a smartphone adapter for direct slit lamp imaging. Methods: A single-center, prospective, clinical study conducted in the Department of Ophthalmology at the University Hospital Zurich, Switzerland. The smartphone group consisted of 26 medical staff (consultants, residents, and students). The control group consisted of one ophthalmic photographer. Both groups took images of the anterior and the posterior eye segment of the same proband. The control group used professional photography equipment. The participant group used an Apple iPhone 11 mounted on a slit lamp via a removable SlitREC smartphone adapter (Custom Surgical GmbH, Munich, Germany). The image quality was graded independently by two blinded ophthalmologists on a scale from 0 (low) to 10 (high quality). Images with a score ≥ 7.0/10 were considered as good as the reference images. The acquisition time was measured. A questionnaire on usability and experience in smartphone and slit lamp use was taken by all of the participants. Results: Each participant had three attempts at the same task. The overall smartphone quality was 7.2/10 for the anterior and 6.4/10 for the posterior segment. The subjectively perceived difficulty decreased significantly over the course of three attempts (Kendall’s W). Image quality increased as well but did not improve significantly from take 1 to take 3. However, the image quality of the posterior segment was significantly, positively correlated (Spearman’s Rho) with work experience. The mean acquisition time for anterior segment imaging was faster in the smartphone group compared to the control group (156 vs. 206 s). It was vice versa for the posterior segment (180 vs. 151 s). Conclusion: Slit lamp imaging with the presented smartphone adapter provides high-quality imaging of the anterior segment. Posterior segment imaging remains challenging in terms of image quality. The adapter constitutes a cost-effective, portable, easy-to-use solution for recording ophthalmic photos and videos. It can facilitate clinical documentation and communication among colleagues and with the patient especially outside normal consultation hours. Direct slit lamp imaging allows for time to be saved and increases the independence of ophthalmologists in terms of patient mobility and the availability of photographic staff.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9913954
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-99139542023-02-11 Smartphone Slit Lamp Imaging—Usability and Quality Assessment Muth, Daniel Rudolf Blaser, Frank Foa, Nastasia Scherm, Pauline Mayer, Wolfgang Johann Barthelmes, Daniel Zweifel, Sandrine Anne Diagnostics (Basel) Article Purpose: To assess the usability and image quality of a smartphone adapter for direct slit lamp imaging. Methods: A single-center, prospective, clinical study conducted in the Department of Ophthalmology at the University Hospital Zurich, Switzerland. The smartphone group consisted of 26 medical staff (consultants, residents, and students). The control group consisted of one ophthalmic photographer. Both groups took images of the anterior and the posterior eye segment of the same proband. The control group used professional photography equipment. The participant group used an Apple iPhone 11 mounted on a slit lamp via a removable SlitREC smartphone adapter (Custom Surgical GmbH, Munich, Germany). The image quality was graded independently by two blinded ophthalmologists on a scale from 0 (low) to 10 (high quality). Images with a score ≥ 7.0/10 were considered as good as the reference images. The acquisition time was measured. A questionnaire on usability and experience in smartphone and slit lamp use was taken by all of the participants. Results: Each participant had three attempts at the same task. The overall smartphone quality was 7.2/10 for the anterior and 6.4/10 for the posterior segment. The subjectively perceived difficulty decreased significantly over the course of three attempts (Kendall’s W). Image quality increased as well but did not improve significantly from take 1 to take 3. However, the image quality of the posterior segment was significantly, positively correlated (Spearman’s Rho) with work experience. The mean acquisition time for anterior segment imaging was faster in the smartphone group compared to the control group (156 vs. 206 s). It was vice versa for the posterior segment (180 vs. 151 s). Conclusion: Slit lamp imaging with the presented smartphone adapter provides high-quality imaging of the anterior segment. Posterior segment imaging remains challenging in terms of image quality. The adapter constitutes a cost-effective, portable, easy-to-use solution for recording ophthalmic photos and videos. It can facilitate clinical documentation and communication among colleagues and with the patient especially outside normal consultation hours. Direct slit lamp imaging allows for time to be saved and increases the independence of ophthalmologists in terms of patient mobility and the availability of photographic staff. MDPI 2023-01-24 /pmc/articles/PMC9913954/ /pubmed/36766528 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics13030423 Text en © 2023 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Muth, Daniel Rudolf
Blaser, Frank
Foa, Nastasia
Scherm, Pauline
Mayer, Wolfgang Johann
Barthelmes, Daniel
Zweifel, Sandrine Anne
Smartphone Slit Lamp Imaging—Usability and Quality Assessment
title Smartphone Slit Lamp Imaging—Usability and Quality Assessment
title_full Smartphone Slit Lamp Imaging—Usability and Quality Assessment
title_fullStr Smartphone Slit Lamp Imaging—Usability and Quality Assessment
title_full_unstemmed Smartphone Slit Lamp Imaging—Usability and Quality Assessment
title_short Smartphone Slit Lamp Imaging—Usability and Quality Assessment
title_sort smartphone slit lamp imaging—usability and quality assessment
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9913954/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36766528
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics13030423
work_keys_str_mv AT muthdanielrudolf smartphoneslitlampimagingusabilityandqualityassessment
AT blaserfrank smartphoneslitlampimagingusabilityandqualityassessment
AT foanastasia smartphoneslitlampimagingusabilityandqualityassessment
AT schermpauline smartphoneslitlampimagingusabilityandqualityassessment
AT mayerwolfgangjohann smartphoneslitlampimagingusabilityandqualityassessment
AT barthelmesdaniel smartphoneslitlampimagingusabilityandqualityassessment
AT zweifelsandrineanne smartphoneslitlampimagingusabilityandqualityassessment