-
Clinical & Experimental Ophthalmology Aug 2013The ophthalmoscope, which is an indispensable tool of our profession, is now taken for granted. It is often forgotten that it was only just over 150 years ago that the...
The ophthalmoscope, which is an indispensable tool of our profession, is now taken for granted. It is often forgotten that it was only just over 150 years ago that the first binocular ophthalmoscope was invented. The early instruments were not popular for a variety of reasons. Australians Donald Schultz and Gerald Crock played a major role in improving this instrument and developing the modifications that turned it into an everyday tool of all ophthalmologists.
Topics: Australia; Equipment Design; History, 20th Century; Humans; Ophthalmology; Ophthalmoscopes; Ophthalmoscopy; Vision, Binocular
PubMed: 23231651
DOI: 10.1111/ceo.12048 -
Journal of Physics E: Scientific... Dec 1980
Review
Topics: Eye; Fluorescein Angiography; Fundus Oculi; Humans; Light Coagulation; Ophthalmoscopes; Optics and Photonics; Photography
PubMed: 7005429
DOI: 10.1088/0022-3735/13/12/001 -
IEEE Transactions on Bio-medical... Jul 1981
Topics: Fundus Oculi; Humans; Lasers; Microcomputers; Ophthalmoscopes; Ophthalmoscopy; Optics and Photonics
PubMed: 7275128
DOI: 10.1109/TBME.1981.324734 -
Physiological Measurement Feb 2002Currently retinal imaging is performed with the fundus camera. This has a number of limitations, in particular the high level of illuminations required for imaging. The... (Review)
Review
Currently retinal imaging is performed with the fundus camera. This has a number of limitations, in particular the high level of illuminations required for imaging. The scanning laser ophthalmoscope (SLO) has been proposed as an alternative imaging device but to date one of its main limitations has been that it gives only monochromatic images. In this paper we describe an SLO which uses low power red, green and blue lasers to image the human fundus. Using three lasers simultaneously to produce a colour image will increase the fundus exposure by a factor of three. To overcome this problem, a technique has been developed for multiplexing the lasers so that each point on the retina is imaged by the three lasers pulsed rapidly in sequence. The total exposure is thus kept to the same level as for a single laser and total imaging time is not increased. An example is shown of the image from a patient with diabetic retinopathy.
Topics: Calibration; Color; Electronics; Fundus Oculi; Humans; Image Processing, Computer-Assisted; Lasers; Ophthalmoscopes; Ophthalmoscopy
PubMed: 11876222
DOI: 10.1088/0967-3334/23/1/301 -
The British Journal of Ophthalmology Mar 1964
Topics: Equipment and Supplies; Humans; Ophthalmoscopes; Ophthalmoscopy
PubMed: 14193677
DOI: 10.1136/bjo.48.3.176 -
Archives of Ophthalmology (Chicago,... Dec 1969
Topics: Fundus Oculi; Macula Lutea; Ophthalmoscopes; Optics and Photonics
PubMed: 5355266
DOI: 10.1001/archopht.1969.00990020773010 -
Transactions - American Academy of... 1947
Topics: Humans; Ophthalmoscopes
PubMed: 20297288
DOI: No ID Found -
Eye (London, England) Jan 2023We compare the optical quality and design characteristic a new low cost solar powered binocular indirect ophthalmoscope (BIO), Holo, to Keeler BIO.
OBJECTIVES
We compare the optical quality and design characteristic a new low cost solar powered binocular indirect ophthalmoscope (BIO), Holo, to Keeler BIO.
METHODS
Twenty-four participants each examined 10 simulation eyes using both the Holo and the Keeler BIO with a 30-diopter condensing lens. Number of Lea symbols printed on the retina of simulation eyes seen and time taken to identify them was recorded. Stereoacuity of 12 participants was tested while using the BIOs. Using 7-point Likert scale, participants gave feedback on design characteristic of both BIOs.
RESULTS
There was no statistical difference in number of Lea symbols correctly identified (15.63/20 for Holo vs. 15/20 for Keeler BIO, p = 0.366, paired t test) or time taken to correctly identify each symbol (Holo 0.39 s faster; 95% confidence interval -2.24 to 3.03 s, p = 0.763) using each device. 12 out of 12 participants achieved stereoacuity of 60 arcsec using the Holo while with the Keeler BIO 11 achieved 60 arcsec and one 90 arcsec. There was no statistically significant difference in the scores for clarity of view, quality of illumination, field of view, binocularity, eye strain and robustness between the two devices. The Holo, scored higher for ease of use (6.5 vs. 6, p = 0.00488, Wilcoxon signed-rank test), comfort of wear (6 vs. 5, p = 0.000337) and portability (7 vs. 6, p = 0.000148).
CONCLUSION
The Holo has the potential to be a clinically useful yet affordable diagnostic tool suitable for the first time of equipping eye care workers in low resource settings with a BIO at volume.
Topics: Humans; Visual Acuity; Ophthalmoscopes; Retina; Vision, Binocular
PubMed: 34949786
DOI: 10.1038/s41433-021-01901-7 -
Clinical & Experimental Ophthalmology Jun 2004The 'ease of use' and accuracy in measurement of the vertical optic cup/disc ratio (VCDR) was compared between the conventional direct ophthalmoscope (CO) and Panoptic... (Clinical Trial)
Clinical Trial Comparative Study
BACKGROUND
The 'ease of use' and accuracy in measurement of the vertical optic cup/disc ratio (VCDR) was compared between the conventional direct ophthalmoscope (CO) and Panoptic direct ophthalmoscope (PO) in a group of 'naïve' first year medical students to determine which would be more suitable for non-ophthalmologists.
METHODS
In this quasi-randomized method comparison study, eight students received an introductory session on ophthalmoscopy then examined 18 eyes (9 left, 9 right) with each ophthalmoscope in a private practice. The subjects were the eight students themselves plus two other subjects. Each subject (n = 10) had one eye dilated. Students determined a VCDR and a subjective score of 'ease of use' on a scale of 1 (difficult) to 10 (easy). A consultant ophthalmologist (GAG) determined the benchmark VCDR for each eye with each ophthalmoscope.
RESULTS
Of 288 eye examinations, there were 111 measurements of VCDR using the CO (47 undilated, 64 dilated), and 140 measurements using the PO (75 undilated, 65 dilated). Differences in the students' estimated VCDR and the benchmark were similar for the CO and PO (P = 0.67). 'Ease of use' was scored in 288 eyes and the median score was higher in the PO overall (CO: median 8, IQR 6-9; PO median 9, IQR 8-10; P < 0.0001), and within each session (P < 0.0001 for each session).
CONCLUSIONS
Medical students found the PO much easier to use, with accuracy of rating the VCDR similar to the CO. This comparison would support the wider use of the PO amongst medical students, general practitioners and other primary care providers.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Education, Medical; Female; Humans; Male; Ophthalmoscopes; Ophthalmoscopy; Optic Disk; Reproducibility of Results
PubMed: 15180833
DOI: 10.1111/j.1442-9071.2004.00810.x -
Seminars in Ophthalmology Dec 1998In this article, the methodologies and clinical applications of microperimetry performed by scanning laser ophthalmoscope (SLO) are described. This technique provides...
In this article, the methodologies and clinical applications of microperimetry performed by scanning laser ophthalmoscope (SLO) are described. This technique provides functional results by direct visualization of the macular area. We present the most interesting data about clinical applications in ocular pathology. SLO microperimetry is a new diagnostic tool in ophthalmic practice. It permits an exact, point-to-point correspondence between fundus image and perimetric results, impossible to achieve by projection perimetry, so representing the most suitable device for simultaneous fundus imaging and psychophysical testing. Microperimetry is performed by SLO (Rodenstock),1 which permits other applications. SLO microperimetry allows the real-time functional study of retinal sensitivity by direct ophthalmoscopic control of the retinal surface. Foveal or excentric fixation can be assessed as well. Instability of fixation during computerized perimetry is a possible misleading factor resulting in unexplainable findings, especially in eyes with decreased visual acuity. The main characteristic of microperimetry is the ability to see the stimuli presented on the retina in real time: this permits an accurate monitoring of fixation and correlation of anatomical or pathological features directly with retinal function.
Topics: Humans; Lasers; Ophthalmoscopes; Retinal Diseases; Sensitivity and Specificity; Visual Field Tests
PubMed: 9878671
DOI: 10.3109/08820539809056054