There are 3 core areas to consider:
1. Ease of use; Test systems on typical, older patients (not just a young,
cooperative lab partner)
2. Image quality; both technical possibility and usual reality.
3. Image record keeping
The last one may be very important for medical-legal reasons as well as how
easy the system is to use and access the images. Do you need remote access
for "reading the images"? How will the images be archived? Will images be
integrated into the patient EMR?
Plan to dilate older and/or darkly pigmented irides.
Just my thought for the day,
*Marshall*
Marshall E Tyler, FOPS
TwinChimney.com
Books for the Ophthalmic Photographer
sv *Silk *
On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 10:29 AM, Dave Clark <daveclark86@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Check out this link for the camera Bill used.
http://www.topconmedical.com/products/trcnw400.htm
I totally have a financial interest but this is a great camera and it is
the easiest thing to use.
Warm Regards,
David Clark
Daveclark86@xxxxxxxxx
Cell: 551-579-1062
Sent from my iPhone
On Feb 29, 2016, at 10:26 AM, Bill Fischer <wsfischer@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Katherine
We've been piloting a project where primary care does retinal photos on DR
patients that do not have an eye care provider.
We had the primary care group demo a series of cameras; the Zeiss NM-Pro,
the CenterVue, and the Topcon NW400. They found each to have some strengths
and weaknesses. For example, they liked the image quality on the Zeiss but
found it's large foot print and lack of automation to be a problem.
Eventually, they determined the Topcon NW 400 to be the best camera for
their use based on foot print, automation, image quality and ease of use.
Feel free to contact me off list if you want additional information.
Bill Fischer, MS, CRA, OCT-C
Flaum Eye Institute
University of Rochester
601 Elmwood Avenue, Box 659
Rochester, NY 14642
Office:585-276-5048
On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 10:10 AM, Bennett, Timothy <tbennett1@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
In my experience most non-myd fundus cameras are pretty similar in
operation, ease of use & image quality. I don’t know that there’s a “best”
one out there. All are good at what they are intended for.
I just had a hands-on look at the Eidon retinal scanner a week or so ago (
www.centervue.com). It’s a very interesting device in that it’s a
non-myd confocal scanner with a white light LED (440-650 nm) source for
color imaging. It also does IR. I’ve never seen a device that’s this simple
to use. It’s not perfect, but worth taking a look at for the type of
clinical situation you describe. I’m currently working on a review article
on it and will post a link when done.
No financial interest….
tim
*From:* optimal-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:optimal-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
*On Behalf Of *Lee, Katherine K.
*Sent:* Monday, February 29, 2016 10:00 AM
*To:* optimal@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
*Subject:* [optimal] non-myd cameras
What does everyone think would be the best non-mydriatic camera for use
in a primary care clinic? This might be used by RNs, and medical assistants
without any eye experience. Thanks for your insight.
Katherine K Lee COT
Storm Eye Institute
843-792-2765
pager 17576
If you have received this communication in error, please notify the
sender immediately.
The documents accompanying this facsimile/electronic transmission contain
confidential
information intended only for the use of the individual or entity to
which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged,
confidential, and exempt from disclosure. If the reader of this message is
not the intended recipient, or an employee responsible for delivering the
message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any
disclosure, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication
is strictly prohibited.
