Maintenance Notice

Due to necessary scheduled maintenance, the JMIR Publications website will be unavailable from Wednesday, July 01, 2020 at 8:00 PM to 10:00 PM EST. We apologize in advance for any inconvenience this may cause you.

Who will be affected?

Accepted for/Published in: JMIR mHealth and uHealth

Date Submitted: Dec 16, 2019
Date Accepted: Apr 10, 2020

The final, peer-reviewed published version of this preprint can be found here:

A Novel Device for Smartphone-Based Fundus Imaging and Documentation in Clinical Practice: Comparative Image Analysis Study

Wintergerst MWM, Jansen LG, Holz FG, Finger RP

A Novel Device for Smartphone-Based Fundus Imaging and Documentation in Clinical Practice: Comparative Image Analysis Study

JMIR Mhealth Uhealth 2020;8(7):e17480

DOI: 10.2196/17480

PMID: 32723717

PMCID: 7424474

Evaluation of a novel device for smartphone-based fundus imaging for fundus documentation in clinical practice

  • Maximilian W. M. Wintergerst; 
  • Linus G. Jansen; 
  • Frank G. Holz; 
  • Robert P. Finger

ABSTRACT

Background:

Smartphone-based fundus imaging (SBFI) allows for mobile and inexpensive fundus examination with the potential to revolutionize eye care particularly in lower resources settings. Though, most SBFI adapters convey image quality not comparable to conventional fundus imaging devices (CFI).

Objective:

Evaluation of a novel SBFI device for documentation of a variety of retinal/vitreous pathology in a patient sample with a wide range of refraction and age.

Methods:

Participants were dilated and imaged with the iC2 funduscope (HEINE Optotechnik) using an Apple iPhone 6 in single-image acquisition (image resolution of 2448 x 3264 pixels) or video mode (1248 x 1664 pixels) and a subgroup also by CFI (Zeiss Visucam 500).

Results:

47 eyes from 32 participants (mean age 62.3 ± 19.8, range 7 to 93, mean spherical equivalent -0.78 ± 3.21 dpt, range -7.88 to +7.0 dpt) were included in the study. Mean visual acuity (logMAR) was 0.48 ± 0.66 (range 0 to 2.3). 30% of the eyes were pseudophakic. Image quality was sufficient in all eyes irrespective of refraction. Images acquired with CFI were sharper and there was no significant difference in reflex artifacts and contrast and illumination (p < .001, p = 1 and p = .07, respectively). When comparing image quality at the posterior pole, the mid periphery and the far periphery, glare increased as images were acquired from a more peripheral part of the retina. Reflex artifacts were more frequent in pseudophakic eyes. Image acquisition was also possible in children. Documentation of deep optic nerve cups in video mode conveyed a mock three-dimensional impression.

Conclusions:

High quality SBFI might represent a mobile alternative for fundus documentation in clinical practice.


 Citation

Please cite as:

Wintergerst MWM, Jansen LG, Holz FG, Finger RP

A Novel Device for Smartphone-Based Fundus Imaging and Documentation in Clinical Practice: Comparative Image Analysis Study

JMIR Mhealth Uhealth 2020;8(7):e17480

DOI: 10.2196/17480

PMID: 32723717

PMCID: 7424474

Download PDF


Request queued. Please wait while the file is being generated. It may take some time.

© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.