Evaluation of two portable pupillometers to assess clinical utility

Background: Pupillometers have been proposed as clinical assessment tools. We compared two pupillometers to assess measurement agreement. Materials & methods: We enrolled 30 subjects and simultaneously measured the pupil diameter and light reflex amplitude with an iPhone pupillometer and a porta...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Rachel Eshima McKay, Michael A Kohn, Elliot S Schwartz, Merlin D Larson
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Aldus Press 2020-12-01
Series:Concussion
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.futuremedicine.com/doi/10.2217/cnc-2020-0016
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Background: Pupillometers have been proposed as clinical assessment tools. We compared two pupillometers to assess measurement agreement. Materials & methods: We enrolled 30 subjects and simultaneously measured the pupil diameter and light reflex amplitude with an iPhone pupillometer and a portable infrared pupillometer. We then enrolled 40 additional subjects and made serial measurements with each device. Results: Failure occurred in 30% of attempts made with the iPhone pupillometer compared with 4% of attempts made with the infrared pupillometer (Fisher’s exact p = 0.0001). Method comparison of the two devices used simultaneously showed significant disagreement in dynamic measurements. Conclusion: The iPhone pupillometer had poor repeatability and suggests that it is not a practical tool to support clinical decisions.
ISSN:2056-3299