Reproducibility and repeatability of central corneal thickness measurement in healthy eyes using four different optical devices

dc.authorid0000-0003-2839-2301
dc.contributor.authorKaradağ, Remzi
dc.contributor.authorUnluzeybek, Murat
dc.contributor.authorÇakıcı, Özgür
dc.contributor.authorKanra, Ayse Yagmur
dc.contributor.authorBayramlar, Hüseyin
dc.date.accessioned2025-05-10T19:55:05Z
dc.date.issued2017
dc.departmentİstanbul Medeniyet Üniversitesi
dc.description.abstractThe aim of the study is to compare the measurements of central corneal thickness (CCT) performed by two examiners with four different methods at different times inter- and intra-individually. Thirty healthy people were included in the study. In these measurements, an optical low-coherence reflectometry (OLCR), an optic coherence tomography (OCT), a specular microscopy (SM), and a corneal topography (CT) were used. Two examiners performed the measurements in a consecutive manner. After 1-7 days of the first measurements, the second measurements were performed again consecutively. The mean of three measurements was taken in each session for all devices. In OCT measurements, there was a significant difference between two examiners in both sessions (p < 0.001), while no significant differences were found between two examiners in first and second sessions in SM, CT, and OLCR measurements. When each examiner's measurements were compared to two sessions, there were no significant differences (p > 0.05, for all) except the SM measurements of the first examiner (p = 0.041). When the first measurements of two examiners were compared, the smallest values were of OCT. At the first session of two examiners, there was a significant difference between OCT and CT measurements, and between OCT and OLCR (p < 0.001, p = 0.002 for the first examiner and p < 0.001 for the second examiner, respectively). Our study showed that CCT measurements made by CT and OLCR methods were almost same and highly correlated for both the examiners' measurements. CCTs measured by OCT were on average 30 mu m thinner than CT and OLCR.
dc.identifier.doi10.1007/s10792-016-0369-2
dc.identifier.endpage1045
dc.identifier.issn0165-5701
dc.identifier.issn1573-2630
dc.identifier.issue4
dc.identifier.pmid27723007
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-84990878508
dc.identifier.scopusqualityQ2
dc.identifier.startpage1039
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1007/s10792-016-0369-2
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14730/13254
dc.identifier.volume37
dc.identifier.wosWOS:000406011300036
dc.identifier.wosqualityQ3
dc.indekslendigikaynakWeb of Science
dc.indekslendigikaynakScopus
dc.indekslendigikaynakPubMed
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherSpringer
dc.relation.ispartofInternational Ophthalmology
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanı
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.snmzKA_WOS_20250302
dc.subjectCentral corneal thickness
dc.subjectPachymetry
dc.subjectOptical low-coherence reflectometry
dc.subjectOptic coherence tomography
dc.subjectSpecular microscopy
dc.subjectCorneal topography
dc.titleReproducibility and repeatability of central corneal thickness measurement in healthy eyes using four different optical devices
dc.typeArticle

Dosyalar

Orijinal paket

Listeleniyor 1 - 1 / 1
Yükleniyor...
Küçük Resim
İsim:
13254.pdf
Boyut:
385.39 KB
Biçim:
Adobe Portable Document Format