ArticleInternational ophthalmology2024
How to assess blepharoptosis via telemedicine: method and its reliability.
Article in International ophthalmology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo report the method to assess belpahroptosis and its reliability of adult ptosis using video consultation.
methodsThis is a retrospective, comparative, case series. The surgical waiting list for ptosis surgery between 8/2020 and 1/2021 was checked and only cases listed for surgery via video consultation assessment, without any previous face-to-face consultation, were included. The following data were collected for patients who underwent video consultation before surgery: Demographic data, level of experience of clinician, levator function, Cogan's twitch sign, fatigability test, eye motility, presence of lagophthalmos, clinical history to rule out Myasthenia Gravis, other myopathies or Horner syndrome, whether the surgery was performed or canceled, reason for cancellation, date of surgery, type of procedure and surgeon experience.
resultsA total of 176 patients underwent ptosis surgery. From those, 45 patients (25.6%) had only video assessment prior to surgery, 36 patients (80%) eventually underwent ptosis surgery. Surgery was canceled in 20% of the cases: in 2 cases (4.44%) due to misdiagnosis of ptosis during video consultation, confirmed on the day of surgery during pre-surgical face-to-face assessment; the other 7 cases (15.55%) belpharoptosis was confirmed on face-to-face examination but the surgery was canceled due to other reasons. The diagnosis of ptosis assessment via video consultation was corrected in 43 cases (95%) (p_value = 0.156, chi_ square). The accuracy of ptosis diagnosis was 13 out of 15 (86.7%) by fellow assessments and 30 out of 30 (100%) by consultant assessments (p_value = 0.041, chi_ square). In most of the cases ptosis assessment in video consultation included: rough judgment of levator function, eye motility and checking signs of lagophthalmos.
conclusionsVideo consultation is an efficient and reliable way to assess patients with ptosis, with 95% of reliability. Although a thorough ptosis assessment is advised, there was no difference between the accuracy of diagnosis on those who did not have the full suggested assessment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.