Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to determine the repeatability and reproducibility of a new Pattern Electroretinography (PERG) device in healthy subjects. METHODS: A total of 40 eyes of 20 healthy subjects (45.6±6.8 y, 70% female) were enrolled in this prospective study. Steady-state PERG were recorded using the Diopsys NOVA (Diopsys Inc., NJ) to obtain the Magnitude, MagnitudeD, MagnitudeD/Magnitude Ratio, and Signal to Noise Ratio. Subjects underwent 2 "contrast sensitivity" protocols with the same electrodes and 2 after changing electrodes, by a single examiner. Eyes were stimulated separately using high and low contrast patterns. The same examination was repeated by a different operator following the same protocol 6 months after the baseline measures. Repeatability and reproducibility of the readings were calculated using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). A Bland-Altman plot was used to analyze the agreement between measures. RESULTS: ICC of Magnitude, MagnitudeD, MagnitudeD/Magnitude ratio, and SNR were 0.87, 0.81, 0.36, and 0.81, respectively between measures taken with the same electrodes (repeatability). After changing electrodes, ICC of the Magnitude, MagD, MagD/Mag ratio, and SNR were 0.79, 0.85, 0.51, and 0.83, respectively during the same session as baseline measures, and 0.87, 0.85, 0.40, and 0.76 when repeated after 6 months (reproducibility). The variability of MagD/Mag ratio increased with successive test repetitions. CONCLUSIONS: Mag, MagD, and SNR were repeatable and reproducible, whereas the MagD/Mag ratio was less repeatable and reproducible. These results suggest that the former parameters are sufficiently reliable to be used in clinical practice.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gillmann et al. (2018) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: