Agreement between Subjective and Objective Parameters Using Meibography for Assessment of Dry Eye Syndrome

Ijlal Taimoor; Syed Abid Hassan Naqvi; Taimoor Ashraf Khan; Saquib Naeem; Waseem Yousaf; Muhammad Usman Ghani

doi:10.51253/pafmj.v73iSUPPL-2.9858

Authors

Ijlal Taimoor Department of Ophthalmology, Armed Forces Institute of Ophthalmology/National University of Medical Sciences (NUMS) Rawalpindi Pakistan
Syed Abid Hassan Naqvi Department of Ophthalmology, Armed Forces Institute of Ophthalmology/National University of Medical Sciences (NUMS) Rawalpindi Pakistan
Taimoor Ashraf Khan Department of Ophthalmology, Armed Forces Institute of Ophthalmology/National University of Medical Sciences (NUMS) Rawalpindi Pakistan
Saquib Naeem Department of Ophthalmology, Armed Forces Institute of Ophthalmology/National University of Medical Sciences (NUMS) Rawalpindi Pakistan
Waseem Yousaf Department of Ophthalmology, Armed Forces Institute of Ophthalmology/National University of Medical Sciences (NUMS) Rawalpindi Pakistan
Muhammad Usman Ghani Department of Ophthalmology, Armed Forces Institute of Ophthalmology/National University of Medical Sciences (NUMS) Rawalpindi Pakistan

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.51253/pafmj.v73iSUPPL-2.9858

Keywords:

Computerized grading system,, Dry eye disease, Meibography, Objective grading system, Subjective grading system

Abstract

Objective: To determine the agreement between subjective and objective parameters using meibography.

Study Design: Cross-sectional observational study.

Place and Duration of Study: Armed Forces Institute of Ophthalmology (AFIO), Rawalpindi Pakistan from August 2021 till
February 2022.

Methodology: 100 patients were included in the study. Non-contact infra-red meibography was performed on each patient. Subjective assessment was done using the four-grade and five-grade scales while objective assessment was done by applying computerized grading.

Results: A total of one hundred (n=100) patients participated in the study. Out of total, 60% patients were male and 40% were females, with a mean age 42.25±14.9 years. There was statistically significant difference was seen Session I OII vs Session II OII as p-value <0.001 in Grade-4, Session-I OIII vs Session-II OIII as p-value <0.001 in Grade-5. There was not statistically significant difference seen in Computerized Grading (100-grade scale) as p-value >0.05. Correlations between observers was best with the 5-grade scale followed by the computerized 100-grade scale and 4-grade scale.

Conclusions: We found that the reliability of the 5-grade scale was poorer to that of the 4-grade scales. We also concluded that computerized grading offers a better intra and inter-observer assessment.