PubMed · 14838064
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
A POSNER. 1951. Recent developments in tonometry.. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9394(51)91036-7
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
PURPOSE: To compare patient data retrieval between electronic patient record systems (Eyetrack) and conventional paper records (CPRs). METHODS: A total of 20 long term glaucoma patient records held on Eyetrack were randomised into two collections with 10 CPRs and 10 Eyetrack records in each collection. The Eyetrack records of one collection were the CPRs of the other collection and vice versa. Four doctors, as two groups, were assessed on a separate collection of records. The time taken to answer 10 questions and the accuracy were assessed. Comparison was made of the answers between the two formats. A month later each group was assessed on the 10 CPRs of the other collection. An expert Eyetrack user was assessed on only the 20 Eyetrack notes. Comparison was made between the 20 CPRs the doctors were assessed on and the 20 eyetrack records. RESULTS: In the first comparison, the mean time for all the doctors to answer the questions on a CPR was 324.4(+/-106.0) s compared to 104.8(+/-34.0) s for Eyetrack(Mann-Whitney, P<0.01). Mean accuracy for a CPR was 84.0%(+/-13.0%) compared to 98.0%(+/-4.0%) for Eyetrack(Mann-Whitney, P<0.01). Comparing the expert Eyetrack user with the CPR showed a mean time for Eyetrack of 96.6(+/-34.8) s compared with 283.7(+/-63.9) s for CPR(Mann-Whitney, P<0.0001). Mean accuracy for Eyetrack was 97.5%(+/-7.2%) compared to 82.0%(+/-8.7%) for CPRs(Mann-Whitney, P<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: An improvement of 3 min 40 s per record was observed with Eyetrack. Accuracy was also improved. Similar results were also found comparing an expert Eyetrack user with CPRs.
OBJECTIVES: Although several works in the past have examined the effect of haemodialysis (HD) on intraocular pressure (IOP), reported findings, theories, and conclusions are very different. The objectives of this article are to resume the reported evidence of IOP changes during HD, to review the proposed hypothesis of HD influence on IOP, and to determine if ophthalmic examination is imperative in HD patients. METHODS: We analysed the peer-reviewed English literature and selected all possible relevant articles. RESULTS: The influence of HD on IOP is not clear, and even in recent studies opposite findings can be found. CONCLUSIONS: Future studies are needed to clarify the effects of HD on IOP. In patients with glaucoma or with predisposed narrow angles, or eyes with impaired aqueous outflow, the possibility of acute IOP rise during HD could be much more frequent than in normal patients. So in these patients, a more strict ophthalmic scheduled examination seems to be feasible.