Premium
Macular thickness assessed with spectral domain OCT in a population‐based study of children: normative data, repeatability and reproducibility and comparison with time domain OCT
Author(s) -
Molnar Anna,
Holmström Gerd,
Larsson Eva
Publication year - 2015
Publication title -
acta ophthalmologica
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.534
H-Index - 87
eISSN - 1755-3768
pISSN - 1755-375X
DOI - 10.1111/aos.12695
Subject(s) - repeatability , reproducibility , cirrus , ophthalmology , intraclass correlation , medicine , population , optometry , mathematics , geology , statistics , remote sensing , environmental health
Purpose To collect data on macular thickness assessed with Cirrus OCT in healthy children in a population‐based study, to examine the repeatability and reproducibility, and to compare the values with Stratus OCT . Methods Fifty‐eight 6‐ to 15‐year‐old children, born at term, were examined. Best‐corrected visual acuity and refraction were assessed. One examiner performed three OCT assessments, and the repeatability was calculated. Thereafter, a second examiner repeated the examinations to calculate the reproducibility. One eye was randomized to be included in the normal material. Finally, the second examiner assessed the macular thickness with the Stratus OCT . Results The mean value (± SD ) of central macular thickness was 255 ± 17 μ m, and the total macular volume was 10.3 ± 0.5 mm 3 . No correlations were found between macular thickness and age, gender or refraction. The coefficients of variance (CoVs) for both repeatability and reproducibility were <1.21%, and the intraclass correlations ( ICC s) were over 0.86. The Cirrus OCT showed a 29% thicker central macular thickness than the Stratus OCT . Conclusion Normal values for macular thickness assessed with Cirrus OCT in healthy full‐term children in a population‐based study were reported. The assessments showed high repeatability and reproducibility. The values of Cirrus and Stratus OCT differed and the techniques were not interchangeable.