Efficiency and accuracy of two computerized topography software systems for fitting rigid gas permeable contact lenses

CLAO Journal

Volumn 26, Issue 2, 2000, Pages 91-96

  Jani, Binoy R ^a   Szczotka, Loretta B ^a  

^a CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

FLUORESCEIN;

ACCURACY; ARTICLE; COMPUTER ASSISTED DIAGNOSIS; COMPUTER PROGRAM; COMPUTER SIMULATION; GAS PERMEABILITY; HARD CONTACT LENS; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; KERATOSCOPY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; TOPOGRAPHY;

CONTACT LENSES; CONTRAST MEDIA; CORNEA; CORNEAL TOPOGRAPHY; FLUORESCEIN; HUMANS; OPHTHALMIC SOLUTIONS; OXYGEN; PERMEABILITY; PROSTHESIS DESIGN; PROSTHESIS FITTING; REFERENCE VALUES; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SOFTWARE; SURFACE PROPERTIES; VIDEO RECORDING;

EID: 0034102397     PISSN: 07338902     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. Szczotka L, Capretta D, Lass J: Clinical Evaluation of a computerized topography software method for fitting rigid gas permeable contact lenses. CLAO J 1994;20:231-236.
2. Lester S, Harris M, Keller S, et al: Clinical applications of corneal topography. ICLC 1994;21:170-173.
3. Leach N, Watanabe D, Younes M: Clinical vs. computer assisted empirical fitting of RGP contact lenses. Optometry and Vision Science 1993;70(125):19.
4. Kennedy D, Mintle L, Schnider C: The computer vs. the optometrist: RGP diagnostic trial fitting procedures compared to the EyeSys computer videokeratography system. Optometry and Vision Science 1994;71(12s):92.
5. Schnider C, Kennedy D, Mintle L, et al: Comparison of computerized corneal topography device nomogram and topographical fits to trial lens fitting. Investigative Ophthalmology Visual Science 1995;36:s312.
6. Szczotka L: Clinical evaluation of a topographically based contact lens fitting software. Optometry and Vision Science 1997;74(1):14-19.
7. Lebow K: Fitting accuracy of an arc step-based contact lens module. Contact Lens Spectrum 1997;30:25-30.
8. Soper B, Shovlin J, Bennett E: Evaluating a topography software program for fitting RGP's. Contact Lens Spectrum 1996; 11(10): 37-40.
9. Donshik PC, Reisner DS, Luistro AE: The Use of computerized videokeratography as an aid in fitting rigid gas permeable ccntact lenses. Transactions of the American Ophthalmological Society 1996;94:135-43.
10. Chan JS, Mandell RB, Johnson L, et al: Contact lens base curve prediction from videokeratography. Optometry and Vision Science 1998;75(6):145-9.
11. Applegate RA, Nunez R, Buettner J, et al: How accurately can Videokeratographic Systems Measure Surface Elevation. Optometry and Vision Science 1995;72(11):785-92.
12. Jeandervin M, Barr J: Comparison of Repeat Videokeratography: Repeatability and Accuracy. Optometry and Vision Science 1998;75(9):663-69.
13. Dave T, Ruston D, Fowler C: Evaluation of the EyeSys Model II Computerized Videokeratoscope. Part I: Clinical Assessment. Optometry and Vision Science 1998;75(9);647-655.
14. Dave T, Ruston D, Fowler C: Evaluation of the EyeSys Model II Computerized Videokeratoscope. Part II: The Repeatability and Accuracy in Measuring Convex Aspheric Surfaces. Optometry and Vision Science 1998;75(9);656-62.
15. Mattioli R, Tripoli N: Corneal Geometry Reconstruction with the Keratron Videokeratographer. Optometry and Vision Science 1997;74(11):881-94.
16. Humphrey Owners Manual.