Evaluation of a Digital Amsler Grid (PocDoc) for Macular Disease Screening: A Comparative Analysis with the Conventional Method

• Published in: Ophthalmology and therapy Vol. 13; no. 5; pp. 1289 - 1301
• Main Authors: Boon, Joewee, Rojas-Carabali, William, Asad, Yusra, Lim, Jonathan Tzien Yih, Rajagopalan, Rajesh, Agrawal, Rupesh
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Cheshire Springer Healthcare 01.05.2024; Adis, Springer Healthcare
• Subjects: Accuracy; Amsler grid; Diagnosis; Internal Medicine; Medicine; Medicine & Public Health; Ophthalmology; Original Research; Screening; Telemedicine; Amsler grid; Screening; Accuracy; Diagnosis; Telemedicine
• ISSN: 2193-8245; 2193-6528
• DOI: 10.1007/s40123-024-00910-5

Introduction Macular diseases are major contributors to visual impairment and blindness worldwide. This study introduces PocDoc, a digital version of the conventional Amsler grid, aimed at enhancing the screening and monitoring of macular diseases. We conducted a comprehensive evaluation to compare the effectiveness of PocDoc against the conventional method. Methods Our comparative analysis involved two distinct phases. Initially, we assessed the capability of both PocDoc and the conventional method in detecting central visual field abnormalities. This phase included a cohort of 72 healthy and 155 eyes affected by various conditions such as age-related macular degeneration (AMD), uveitis, polypoidal choroidal vasculopathy (PCV), and macular telangiectasia. We primarily focused on the area of compromise and observed the correlation between the results obtained from both methods, measuring their concordance using a correlation coefficient. In the second phase, we evaluated the accuracy of both methods in diagnosing AMD. This involved a group of 127 eyes, including 70 healthy and 57 AMD-affected eyes. We determined the sensitivity, specificity, and overall accuracy of each method in diagnosing AMD. Results In the initial phase, both PocDoc and the conventional Amsler grid demonstrated a high correlation in detecting central visual field defects across various macular diseases (correlation coefficient > 0.9). In the second phase, focused on AMD diagnosis, PocDoc showed a sensitivity of 50%, specificity of 100%, and an overall accuracy of 78%. Comparatively, the conventional method exhibited a sensitivity of 49%, specificity of 100%, and accuracy of 77%. Conclusion PocDoc’s digital Amsler grid exhibits comparable effectiveness to the conventional method in both detecting visual field abnormalities across a range of macular diseases and specifically in the diagnosis of AMD. The high correlation in results, combined with the digital advantages of PocDoc, such as ease of use and potential for telemedicine applications, suggests its viability as a valuable tool in the screening and monitoring of macular diseases.