Telemedical diagnosis of retinopathy of prematurity intraphysician agreement between ophthalmoscopic examination and image-based interpretation.

OBJECTIVE To evaluate the intraphysician agreement between ophthalmoscopic examination and image-based telemedical interpretation for retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) diagnosis, when performed by the same expert physician grader. DESIGN Prospective, nonrandomized, comparative study. PARTICIPANTS Sixty-seven consecutive premature infants who underwent ROP examination at a major university medical center whose parents consented for participation. METHODS Infants underwent standard dilated ophthalmoscopy by one of two pediatric ophthalmologists, followed by retinal imaging with a commercially available wide-angle fundus camera by a trained neonatal nurse. Study examinations were performed at 31 to 33 weeks postmenstrual age (PMA) and/or 35 to 37 weeks PMA. Images were uploaded to a Web-based telemedicine system developed by the authors. After a 4- to 12-month period, telemedical interpretations were performed in which each physician graded images from infants upon whom he had initially performed ophthalmoscopic examinations. Diagnoses were classified using an ordinal scale: no ROP, mild ROP, type 2 prethreshold ROP, and treatment-requiring ROP. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Absolute intraphysician agreement and kappa statistic between ophthalmoscopic examination and telemedical interpretation were calculated by eye. All intraphysician discrepancies were reviewed, and underlying causes were classified by eye as no ROP identified by ophthalmoscopic examination, no ROP identified by telemedical interpretation, discrepancy about presence of zone 1 ROP, discrepancy about presence of plus disease, or other discrepancy in classification of ROP stage. RESULTS Absolute intraphysician agreement between ophthalmoscopic examination and telemedical interpretation was 86.3%. The kappa statistic for intraphysician agreement between examinations ranged from 0.657 (substantial agreement) for diagnosis of treatment-requiring ROP to 0.854 (near-perfect agreement) for diagnosis of mild or worse ROP. Among 206 eye examinations (103 infant examinations), there were 28 (13.6%) intraphysician discrepancies in diagnosis, 8 of which resulted from uncertainty about presence of zone 1 disease and 4 from uncertainty about presence of plus disease. CONCLUSIONS Intraphysician agreement between ophthalmoscopic examination and telemedical interpretation for ROP was very high. Neither examination modality appeared to have a systematic tendency to overdiagnose or underdiagnose ROP. Diagnosis of zone 1 disease and plus disease were major sources of clinically significant discrepancies.

[1]  Justin Starren,et al.  Accuracy and reliability of remote retinopathy of prematurity diagnosis. , 2006, Archives of ophthalmology.

[2]  E. Palmer,et al.  Multicenter trial of cryotherapy for retinopathy of prematurity: natural history ROP: ocular outcome at 5(1/2) years in premature infants with birth weights less than 1251 g. , 2002, Archives of ophthalmology.

[3]  Penny Jennett,et al.  Telemedicine approach to screening for severe retinopathy of prematurity: a pilot study. , 2003, Ophthalmology.

[4]  J. Martin,et al.  Births: preliminary data for 2005. , 2006, National vital statistics reports : from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics, National Vital Statistics System.

[5]  Michael F Chiang,et al.  Interexpert agreement of plus disease diagnosis in retinopathy of prematurity. , 2007, Archives of ophthalmology.

[6]  J W Peabody,et al.  Comparison of vignettes, standardized patients, and chart abstraction: a prospective validation study of 3 methods for measuring quality. , 2000, JAMA.

[7]  J Starren,et al.  Remote image based retinopathy of prematurity diagnosis: a receiver operating characteristic analysis of accuracy , 2006, British Journal of Ophthalmology.

[8]  Michael F Chiang,et al.  Plus disease in retinopathy of prematurity: an analysis of diagnostic performance. , 2007, Transactions of the American Ophthalmological Society.

[9]  Isaac Ben-Sira,et al.  An international classification of retinopathy of prematurity. Clinical experience. , 1985, Ophthalmology.

[10]  Raúl San José Estépar,et al.  Interobserver variability in the determination of upper lobe-predominant emphysema. , 2007, Chest.

[11]  F. Holz,et al.  Agreement among ophthalmologists in evaluating fluorescein angiograms in patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration for photodynamic therapy eligibility (FLAP-study). , 2003, Ophthalmology.

[12]  H E Rockette,et al.  Effects of luminance and resolution on observer performance with chest radiographs. , 2000, Radiology.

[13]  Charles W Callahan,et al.  Effectiveness of an Internet-based store-and-forward telemedicine system for pediatric subspecialty consultation. , 2005, Archives of pediatrics & adolescent medicine.

[14]  C. Gilbert,et al.  Childhood blindness in the context of VISION 2020--the right to sight. , 2001, Bulletin of the World Health Organization.

[15]  R. A. Petersen,et al.  RetCam imaging for retinopathy of prematurity screening. , 2006, Journal of AAPOS : the official publication of the American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus.

[16]  T. L. Williams,et al.  Systematic review of cost effectiveness studies of telemedicine interventions , 2002, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[17]  J. Flynn,et al.  Screening for retinopathy of prematurity employing the retcam 120: sensitivity and specificity. , 2001, Archives of ophthalmology.

[18]  J. Flynn,et al.  The optimum time to employ telephotoscreening to detect retinopathy of prematurity. , 2000, Transactions of the American Ophthalmological Society.

[19]  J. R. Landis,et al.  The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. , 1977, Biometrics.

[20]  J. Whited,et al.  Reliability and accuracy of dermatologists' clinic-based and digital image consultations. , 1999, Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology.

[21]  Anna L. Ells,et al.  The International Classification of Retinopathy of Prematurity revisited. , 2005, Archives of ophthalmology.

[22]  Justin Starren,et al.  Telemedical retinopathy of prematurity diagnosis: accuracy, reliability, and image quality. , 2007, Archives of ophthalmology.

[23]  Craig A Sable,et al.  Impact of telemedicine on the practice of pediatric cardiology in community hospitals. , 2002, Pediatrics.

[24]  K. Yen,et al.  Interexaminer reliability in physical examination of pediatric patients with abdominal pain. , 2005, Archives of pediatrics & adolescent medicine.

[25]  D. Leonetti,et al.  Ophthalmoscopy versus fundus photographs for detecting and grading diabetic retinopathy. , 1992, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[26]  David B. Nash,et al.  Clinical Vignette-Based Surveys: A Tool for Assessing Physician Practice Variation , 2005, American journal of medical quality : the official journal of the American College of Medical Quality.

[27]  B. Munoz,et al.  Blindness and visual impairment in the Americas and the Caribbean , 2002, The British journal of ophthalmology.

[28]  Marilynne Hebert,et al.  TELEMEDICINE APPROACH TO SCREENING FOR SEVERE RETINOPATHY OF PREMATURITY , 2003 .

[29]  John A. Jones,et al.  Multicenter trial of cryotherapy for retinopathy of prematurity: preliminary results. Cryotherapy for Retinopathy of Prematurity Cooperative Group. , 1988, Pediatrics.

[30]  A. Fielder,et al.  Preliminary results of treatment of eyes with high-risk prethreshold retinopathy of prematurity in the early treatment for retinopathy of prematurity randomized trial. , 2003, Archives of ophthalmology.

[31]  M. Field,et al.  Telemedicine and remote patient monitoring. , 2002, JAMA.

[32]  R. Klein,et al.  Comparison between ophthalmoscopy and fundus photography in determining severity of diabetic retinopathy. , 1985, Ophthalmology.