Linked Life Data

2319090

Source:http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/id/2319090

Statements in which the resource exists as a subject.
PredicateObject
rdf:type
lifeskim:mentions
pubmed:issue
1
pubmed:dateCreated
1990-4-27
pubmed:abstractText
To compare the quality of fundus evaluations conducted with natural and dilated pupils, 500 typical adult subjects, divided into five age categories, were examined using both techniques. Direct and monocular indirect ophthalmoscopes were used with the natural pupils; direct and binocular indirect scopes were used for the dilated examinations. Retinal anomalies were classified on the basis of posterior pole or peripheral location and whether the anomalies would require significant action by the doctor. Of the 32 posterior pole anomalies which required action, 38% were missed during the natural pupil examination; 51% of the anomalies not requiring immediate action were also missed. These miss rates, along with the 287 anomalies found in the periphery (20 of which required immediate action), suggest that dilation should be strongly considered for all patients so as to optimize the probability of detecting fundus anomalies.
pubmed:commentsCorrections
pubmed:language
eng
pubmed:journal
pubmed:citationSubset
IM
pubmed:chemical
pubmed:status
MEDLINE
pubmed:month
Jan
pubmed:issn
0003-0244
pubmed:author
pubmed:issnType
Print
pubmed:volume
61
pubmed:owner
NLM
pubmed:authorsComplete
Y
pubmed:pagination
25-34
pubmed:dateRevised
2006-11-15
pubmed:meshHeading
pubmed:year
1990
pubmed:articleTitle
A comparison of diagnostic outcomes with and without pupillary dilatation.
pubmed:affiliation
Pacific University College of Optometry, Forest Grove, OR 97116.
pubmed:publicationType
Journal Article, Comparative Study