Ana Rosa Barrio

Clinical relevance: Multidiagnostic systems have recently appeared on the market. Knowledge of the repeatability and validity of any instrument is mandatory before its introduction in clinical practice. Background: The aim of this work is to examine the intrasession repeatability of anterior pole measurements provided by the multidiagnostic device Wave Analyzer Medica 700 (WAM700) and agreement with Pentacam measurements in normal eyes. Methods: In the right eyes of 113 participants, three repeat measurements of central keratometry, central corneal thickness, anterior chamber depth and corneal eccentricity were made with the WAM700 and Pentacam in random order. Intrasession repeatability and agreement were determined. Results: Employing WAM700, intrasession repeatability for keratometry, central corneal thickness and anterior chamber depth was good (ICCs >= 0.992; CV 0.48-0.98%), yet worse than the values obtained for the Pentacam (ICCs >= 0.998; CV 0-0.33%). WAM700 showed excellent intrasession repeatability when used to measure the anterior chamber depth (Sw 0.03 mm). However, the repeatability of this device was inferior for central corneal thickness (Sw 4.24 mu m) and keratometry measurements (Sw < 0.21 D) and was poor for corneal eccentricity (Sw 0.07; ICC 0.908; CV 14.58%). Agreement between WAM700 and Pentacam showed a high ICC for the keratometry measurements, central corneal thickness and anterior chamber depth (>0.972) but lower for corneal eccentricity (ICC 0.762). Conclusions: In healthy eyes, the WAM700 multidiagnostic device showed good intrasession repeatability for keratometry, central corneal thickness and anterior chamber depth measurements. Agreement between WAM700 and Pentacam was good for the anterior chamber depth measurement. However, these instruments cannot be considered interchangeable for keratometry, central corneal thickness and eccentricity readings.

The Ocular Comfort Index (OCI) assesses ocular surface irritation and grades the severity of dry eye disease. This study sought to adapt the OCI questionnaire into Spanish, and then to assess the psychometric performance and validity of the new adapted version (OCI-versión española, OCI_VE). The questionnaire was translated, back translated, and then cross-culturally adapted for use with Spanish-speaking individuals. The OCI_VE was completed by 450 participants, including 53 subjects that were diagnosed with dry eye disease. Through a Rasch analysis, the psychometric properties of item fit, targeting, person separation, reliability, and differential item functioning (DIF) were assessed. To test the convergent validity, we examined the correlation between the OCI_VE and the Computer Vision Symptom Scale (CVSS17). Validity was tested in a subgroup of participants with and without dry eye, and test-retest repeatability was determined in a subset of 151 individuals. We also compared, via DIF, the performance of the OCI_VE with that of the original OCI. Our Rasch analysis revealed a good model fit, high accuracy, good targeting, unidimensionality, and no DIF according to gender. The validity and repeatability were good. The OCI_VE shows comparable psychometric properties to the original English version, making it a valid tool for measuring dry eye symptoms in Spanish adults.

To determine the repeatability of mesopic high-contrast (HC) and low-contrast (LC) visual acuity (VA) measurements made at distance and near in healthy young individuals. While the repeatability of photopic VA is well-known, there is a lack of information with regard to the repeatability of VA measured under low luminance conditions. In two different sessions 1 week apart, best-corrected monocular VA was determined using HC (96 %) and LC (10 %) ETDRS charts under mesopic luminance conditions (0.75 cd/m²) at distance (HCD, LCD) and near (HCN, LCN) in 47 healthy subjects aged 22.9 ± 6.8 years. Repeatability was estimated by the Bland and Altman method, whereby the mean difference (MD) and the 95 % limits of agreement were determined as the coefficient of repeatability (COR). Mean logMAR VA values were HCD = 0.09, LCD = 0.44, HCN = 0.21, and LCN = 0.57. Mean differences in measurements between sessions 1 and 2 were not significant, and low in clinical terms (≤1 letter). Repeatability was better for the distance measurements at both high and lowcontrast (COR _HCD ±0.11 and COR _LCD ±0.11 logMAR vs COR _HCN ±0.15 and COR _LCN ±0.16 logMAR), and MDs were also slightly closer to zero for the distance measurements. Similar repeatability was observed between HC and LC VA, both at distance and near. In mesopic conditions, ETDRS charts offer repeatable best-corrected monocular VA measurements. The criterion for a significant change in logMAR VA was 1 line at distance and 1.5 lines at near.