![Sample our Medicine, Dentistry, Nursing & Allied Health journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5944/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Medicine-Dentistry-Nursing-Allied-Health.jpg"})
Abstract
Purpose
To compare the precision of central corneal thickness (CCT) measurements taken with the handheld ultrasound pachymeter (USP), ultrasound biomicroscopy (UBM), and the Artemis-2 very high frequency ultrasound scanner (VHFUS) on normal subjects.
Design
Prospective study.
Methods
One eye from each of 61 normal subjects was randomly selected for this study. The measurements of the CCT were taken with the USP, VHFUS, and UBM. Results were compared statistically using repeated-measures analysis of variance (ANOVA), Pearson’s correlation coefficient, and limits of agreement.
Results
The average CCT (± standard deviation) was 530.1 ± 30.5 μm, 554.9 ± 31.7 μm, and 559.5 ± 30.7 μm for UBM, VHFUS, and USP respectively. The intraobserver repeatability analyses of variance are not significant for USP, UBM, and VHFUS. P-values were 0.17, 0.19, and 0.37 respectively. Repeated-measures ANOVA showed a significant difference between the three different methods of measuring CCT (P = 0.0001). The ANOVA test revealed no statistically significant difference between USP and VHFUS (P > 0.05), yet statistical significant differences with UBM versus USP and UBM versus VHFUS (P < 0.001). There were high correlations between the three instruments (P < 0.0001). The mean differences (and upper/lower limits of agreement) for CCT measurements were 29.4 ± 14.3 (2.7/56), 4.6 ± 8.6 (−14.7/23.8), and −24.8 ± 13.1 (−50.4/0.8) for USP versus UBM, USP versus VHFUS, and UBM versus VHFUS, respectively.
Conclusion
The UBM produces CCT measurements that vary significantly from those returned by the USP and the VHFUS, suggesting that the UBM may not be used interchangeably with either equipment for monitoring the CCT in the clinical setting.
Disclosure
The authors report no conflicts of interest in this work.