Abstract：
OBJECTIVE: To determine the accuracy of manual compass measurement and trigonometric determination of proptosis (MCMATDP).
METHODS: This agreement study included 120 eyes without eye diseases or injury of 60 patients who visited the ophthalmic clinic of Peking University Shenzhen Hospital from February 2020 to June 2020. The absolute values of proptosis were measured by MCMATDP and computed tomography (CT). The differences between the two methods were shown by Bland-Altman plot.
RESULTS: The cohort comprised 25 males and 35 females (average age 38.3 years). The absolute value of proptosis measured by CT was correlated with the MCMATDP. Further analysis showed that a 95% limit of agreement (LoA) was - 0.53 to 0.60 mm in the right eye and - 0.46 to 0.55 mm in the left eye between CT and MCMATDP. In addition, the 95% LoA was - 0.49 to 0.60 mm in both eyes between the two methods. All points were < 5% in Bland-Altman plots.
CONCLUSIONS: Compared to CT, MCMATDP is rather consistent in proptosis measurement. The new method is feasible in clinical practice when measuring proptosis. With the development of non-contact intelligent measurement software and the continuous improvement in measurement accuracy, a non-invasive, simple, and inexpensive measurement mode is true based on the theory of MCMATDP.
METHODS: This agreement study included 120 eyes without eye diseases or injury of 60 patients who visited the ophthalmic clinic of Peking University Shenzhen Hospital from February 2020 to June 2020. The absolute values of proptosis were measured by MCMATDP and computed tomography (CT). The differences between the two methods were shown by Bland-Altman plot.
RESULTS: The cohort comprised 25 males and 35 females (average age 38.3 years). The absolute value of proptosis measured by CT was correlated with the MCMATDP. Further analysis showed that a 95% limit of agreement (LoA) was - 0.53 to 0.60 mm in the right eye and - 0.46 to 0.55 mm in the left eye between CT and MCMATDP. In addition, the 95% LoA was - 0.49 to 0.60 mm in both eyes between the two methods. All points were < 5% in Bland-Altman plots.
CONCLUSIONS: Compared to CT, MCMATDP is rather consistent in proptosis measurement. The new method is feasible in clinical practice when measuring proptosis. With the development of non-contact intelligent measurement software and the continuous improvement in measurement accuracy, a non-invasive, simple, and inexpensive measurement mode is true based on the theory of MCMATDP.
摘要：
目的：确定手动罗盘测量和三角法确定突度（MCMATDP）的准确性。
方法：本协议研究纳入2020年2月至2020年6月在北京大学深圳医院眼科门诊就诊的60例患者的120只眼无眼病或损伤。通过MCMATDP和计算机断层扫描（CT）测量突度的绝对值。Bland-Altman图显示了两种方法之间的差异。
结果：该队列包括25名男性和35名女性（平均年龄38.3岁）。CT测量的眼球突出的绝对值与MCMATDP相关。进一步的分析表明，在CT和MCMATDP之间，右眼的95％一致性极限（LoA）为-0.53至0.60mm，左眼为-0.46至0.55mm。此外,在两种方法中,双眼的95%LoA为-0.49至0.60mm。在Bland-Altman地块中，所有分数均<5％。
结论：与CT相比，MCMATDP在突起测量中相当一致。新方法在测量突度时在临床实践中是可行的。随着非接触式智能测量软件的发展和测量精度的不断提高,非侵入性的，简单,基于MCMATDP理论，廉价的测量模式是正确的。
方法：本协议研究纳入2020年2月至2020年6月在北京大学深圳医院眼科门诊就诊的60例患者的120只眼无眼病或损伤。通过MCMATDP和计算机断层扫描（CT）测量突度的绝对值。Bland-Altman图显示了两种方法之间的差异。
结果：该队列包括25名男性和35名女性（平均年龄38.3岁）。CT测量的眼球突出的绝对值与MCMATDP相关。进一步的分析表明，在CT和MCMATDP之间，右眼的95％一致性极限（LoA）为-0.53至0.60mm，左眼为-0.46至0.55mm。此外,在两种方法中,双眼的95%LoA为-0.49至0.60mm。在Bland-Altman地块中，所有分数均<5％。
结论：与CT相比，MCMATDP在突起测量中相当一致。新方法在测量突度时在临床实践中是可行的。随着非接触式智能测量软件的发展和测量精度的不断提高,非侵入性的，简单,基于MCMATDP理论，廉价的测量模式是正确的。
