Mobile Endoscopy vs Video Tower: A Prospective Comparison of Video Quality and Diagnostic Accuracy
Objective To determine if any significant difference exists between endoscopic videos captured with a mobile adaptor and videos captured with a traditional tower. Study Design Prospective controlled blinded comparison of mobile endoscopic videos captured through 2 methods. Methods Thirty randomly se...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Otolaryngology-head and neck surgery 2016-10, Vol.155 (4), p.575-580 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Objective
To determine if any significant difference exists between endoscopic videos captured with a mobile adaptor and videos captured with a traditional tower.
Study Design
Prospective controlled blinded comparison of mobile endoscopic videos captured through 2 methods.
Methods
Thirty randomly selected patients underwent video endoscopy with both mobile and video tower recording methods. Sixty videos were edited into a series of 10-second clips. Thirteen otolaryngology staff and residents rated the video quality and provided a diagnosis for each video.
Results
We found no significant difference in the video quality ratings between mobile and tower videos (mean difference, −0.07; P < .37). Similarly, we found no significant difference in the observers’ diagnostic accuracy (mean difference, 1.54%; P < .686).
Conclusion
With adequate power, our study was unable to demonstrate a difference between mobile adapter videos and tower videos. Our findings suggest that mobile adapter videos may reasonably be used in lieu of tower videos in clinical practice. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0194-5998 1097-6817 |
DOI: | 10.1177/0194599816650637 |