Programm                 "Degeneration und Regeneration– Grundlagen, Diagnostik und Therapie"

   Hotel Registration
   Welcome address
Beteiligte Gesellschaften
   Societies involved
DOG Information
   DOG Information
Eröffnung des Kongresses
   Opening Ceremony
Ablauf der Tagung 2003
   General overview of congress
Lageplan der Räumlichkeiten
   Map of Congress Center
Wissenschaftliche Themen
   Scientific topics
Wissenschaftliches Programm
   Scientific program
   Poster Presentation
Begleitende Veranstaltungen
   Accompanying program
   Working sessions
   Social program
Allgemeine Informationen
   General Information
   Index of Authors
   Commercial exhibitors

DOG Homepage


Analyzation of the Nerve Fiber Layer using the GDx® System Requires Highly Experienced Observers

Welsandt G., Jonescu-Cuypers J., Kazakova D., Krieglstein G. K., Mietz H.
Department of Ophthalmology, University of Cologne, Germany

Purpose: Analyzation of the nerve fiber layer is an increasingly frequently performed clinical examination. In an effort to make the handling of the GDx® system easier for the person performing the examination, the software supplied by the manufacturer includes specific arithmetic algorithms that are designed to reflect the accuracy of the measurement. It would be desirable to have an easy-to-use system, so that even technical assistants can perform the examination with little experience and high accuracy. For a first test, we have chosen two groups of well-trained ophthalmologists performing routine measurements using the GDx® system.
Method: Group one of the ophthalmologists had an experience of more than 1.000 optic nerve head examinations using a similar system. Group two of the ophthalmologists had an experience of less than 20 examinations. Factors that were evaluated included the total time needed for the examination, image vignetting, overall image quality and even image illumination. Statistics were performed using the Wilcoxon signed rank test.
Results: 14% of the examinations could not be evaluated because of poor image quality and centering. The time needed for the examination was about three times more in group 2 as compared to group 1 (p<0.001). Overall image quality was better in group 1

Zurück | Back