Agreement and repeatability of scotopic pupil size measurement with the 2WIN-S portable refractor in Chinese adults

Abstract

To assess the agreement and repeatability of scotopic pupil size measurement using 2WIN-S (Adaptica, Padova, Italy) portable refractor in Chinese adults. This prospective non-randomized open-label controlled study assessed the scotopic pupil size of 100 right eyes using OPD-Scan III (Optical path difference) (Nidek Technologies, Gamagori, Japan) and 2WIN-S. OPD-Scan III and 2WIN-S measure pupil size using infrared light and detector, while 2WIN-S measures bilateral eyes simultaneously, OPD-Scan III measures unilateral eyes individually. Participants were first measured once using OPD-Scan III and two consecutive measurements were performed using 2WIN-S after 15 min of rest interval. The primary outcome was to evaluate the agreement between 2WIN-S and OPD-Scan III, and the secondary outcome was to evaluate the repeatability of 2WIN-S. Scotopic pupil size of 100 right eyes of 100 adults (28 male and 72 female) aged 18-53 years (mean 36 ± 12 years) was assessed using OPD-Scan III and 2WIN-S, respectively. The mean scotopic pupil size of OPD-Scan III and 2WIN-S was recorded to be 6.24 ± 0.88 mm and 6.27 ± 0.81 mm, respectively. For the mean scotopic pupil size of OPD-Scan III and 2WIN-S the difference was - 0.03 mm (95%CI - 0.10 to 0.04 mm), p = 0.445, the 95% limits of agreement (LOA) was - 0.71 to 0.66 mm. ICC between the two devices was 0.92 (95% CI 0.88-0.94) (ICC > 0.9 indicates excellent consistency). Coefficients of repeatability (CoR) of 2WIN-S was 0.37, which has a high repeatability. For the mean scotopic pupil size of 2WIN-S of the repeated measurements, the difference was -0.04 mm (95%CI - 0.08 to 0.01 mm), p = 0.019, the 95% limits of agreement (LOA) was - 0.41 to 0.32 mm, with a narrow LOA. However, the majority of the variations were less than ± 0.50 mm (98% of scotopic pupil size measurements were below this threshold), within the clinically acceptable range (± 0.50 mm). Our study showed excellent agreement between 2WIN-S and OPD-Scan III (ICC > 0.9) and a good repeatability of 2WIN-S (CoR = 0.37). This study suggests a novel technique for measuring pupillary responses in low light conditions, which can be considered an alternative to OPD-Scan III in clinical settings.

Figure 1

(a) Frequency distribution of scotopic pupil size with OPD-Scan III measurement. (b) Frequency distribution of scotopic pupil size with 2WIN-S measurement. OPD-Scan III: Optical path difference-Scan III.

Figure 2

Bland–Altman plot showing the bias and 95% limit of agreement of OPD-Scan III compared to 2WIN-S for scotopic pupil size (A solid blue line indicates the mean bias and a dashed red line indicates the 95% bounds of agreement.). OPD-Scan III: Optical path difference-Scan III.

Figure 3

Inter-rater repeatability for 2WIN-S. Note the narrow range of differences between the repeated measurement (A solid blue line indicates the mean bias, and a dashed red line indicates the 95% bounds of agreement.). OPD-Scan III: Optical path difference-Scan III.

Figure 4

Pupil images of participants taken by OPD-Scan III. OPD-Scan III: Optical path difference-Scan III.

Figure 5

Pupil images of participants taken by 2WIN-S.