Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2022 Jun;70(6):2038-2040.
doi: 10.4103/ijo.IJO_3079_21.

Comparison of patient satisfaction with red-free (green) versus yellow light using binocular indirect ophthalmoscope for retinal examination

Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Comparison of patient satisfaction with red-free (green) versus yellow light using binocular indirect ophthalmoscope for retinal examination

Pragya Sharma et al. Indian J Ophthalmol. 2022 Jun.

Abstract

Purpose: Comparison of patient satisfaction with red-free (green) versus yellow light using binocular indirect ophthalmoscope for retinal examination.

Methods: This is an observational questionnaire-based study of 100 myopes in the age group of 18-40 years coming for a routine check-up or for refractive surgery workup. The examination was done using an indirect ophthalmoscope and a 20D lens with green or yellow light and was assigned in two groups randomly using the coin toss method, following which, a questionnaire was used to assess the following parameters: a) level of comfort, b) any complaints of discomfort during examination, d) preference of the used light source in future, e) grading of discomfort on a linear scale, and f) patient cooperation and duration of examination.

Results: Patients were randomized for observation with IDO using either green light (n = 55) or yellow light (n = 45) filter. In the study, 46 patients (83.6%) were very comfortable and only 9 patients (16.4%) experienced mild discomfort when using red-free (green) light, while only 3 patients (6.7%) were very comfortable and 31 (68.9%) had mild discomfort when using yellow light. The complaints of watering with yellow and green light were noted in 36 patients (80.0%) and 15 patients (27.3%), pain in 13 patients (28.9%) and 3 patients (5.5%), light sensitivity in 29 patients (64.4%) and 4 patients (7.3%), respectively, all being significantly more in yellow light category (P < 0.001). The time of examination was significantly more in yellow light category with 83 ± 10.75 seconds (P < 0.001).

Conclusion: Retinal examination using the green filter of indirect ophthalmoscope is more comfortable in examining the patients as compared to routine yellow light with decreased number of complaints, lesser examination time, and better patient cooperation.

Keywords: Indirect ophthalmoscopy; monochromatic light; red free filter; yellow light.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

None

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Bar graph for the assessment of comfort level and source of light used
Figure 2
Figure 2
Bar graph for assessment between complaints and source of light used
Figure 3
Figure 3
Bar graph for assessment of patient cooperation by the clinician and source of light used

Comment in

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Holden BA, Fricke TR, Wilson DA, Jong M, Naidoo KS, Sankaridurg P, et al. Global prevalence of myopia and high myopia and temporal trends from |y2000 |mthrough |d2050. Ophthalmology. 2016;123:1036–42. - PubMed
    1. Gözüm N, Cakir M, Gücukoglu A, Sezen F. Relationship between retinal lesions and axial length, age and sex in high myopia. Eur J Ophthalmol. 1997;7:277–82. - PubMed
    1. Vignal R, Gastaud P, Izambart C, Daubas P, Freton A. Improved visualization of fundus with green-light ophthalmoscopy. J Fr Ophtalmol. 2007;30:271–5. - PubMed
    1. Haefeli M, Elfering A. Pain assessment. Eur Spine J. 2006;15:17–24. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Agarwal D, Saxena R, Gupta V, Mani K, Dhiman R, Bhardawaj A, et al. Prevalence of myopia in Indian school children:Meta-analysis of last four decades. PLoS One. 2020;15:1–18. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types