Normal Subject Population
Conditions
Brief summary
Assessment of handheld fundus images in comparison to conventional fundus camera images.
Detailed description
This study is comparing a small handheld camera with a standard fundus camera for image quality
Interventions
DEVICEHandheld fundus photography
diagnostic imaging with two types of retina camera
Sponsors
University of Rochester
Study design
Observational model
COHORT
Time perspective
PROSPECTIVE
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
Yes
Inclusion criteria
* Age \> 18 * The ability to give informed consent and be willing to spend up to two hours in the eye clinic during the duration of the study. * The subjects may have a normal retina and optic nerve, or subjects may have abnormalities of the posterior pole of the retina or the optic nerve.
Exclusion criteria
* Medical or ophthalmic instability that would create a contraindication for minimally invasive ophthalmic diagnostic testing will exclude participation as a subject. * Ophthalmic pathology felt by the principal investigator that would make retinal imaging with standard photographs difficult or not possible.
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Percentage of photographs that score a 3 or higher on the grading scale | 2-3 years | Photos will be evaluated by ophthalmologists and scored as follows: 1. Unacceptable: cannot see fundus detail 2. Unacceptable: fundus detail visualized, but inadequate for meaningful analysis 3. Acceptable: fundus detail visualized enough to make general comments, with modest improvement image would be of sufficient quality for widespread use 4. Good: fundus detail visualized, meaningful analysis possible, standard photograph superior 5. Excellent: fundus detail visualized as well as standard photograph 6. Superior: fundus detail of higher quality than standard photograph |
Countries
United States
Outcome results
None listed