Abstract
The pupillary evaluation is an essential part of the neurological examination. Research suggests that the traditional examination of the pupil with a handheld flashlight has limited interrater reliability. Automated pupillometers were developed to provide an objective scoring of various pupillary parameters. The NPi-200 pupillometer is used for quantitative pupillary examinations, the NPi-300 was launched in July 2021 with enhanced features. The purpose of this study is to compare results from the NPi-200 to the NPi-300 to ensure that data are translatable across both platforms. This study examines the inter-device reliability of the NPi-200 compared to the NPi-300 in two cohorts: 20 patients at risk for cerebral edema and 50 healthy controls. Paired assessments of the devices were made from all participants. Each assessment included bilateral PLR readings within a 5-minute interval. Data showed high agreement between the two devices for the Neurological Pupil Index (NPi) reading (k = 0.94; CI: 0.91–0.99) and for pupil diameter assessment (k = 0.91; CI: 0.87–0.96). There is a very high level of agreement between the NPi-200 and NPi-300 among healthy controls and critically ill patients. Clinicians and researchers can interpret the results from either device equally.
Original language | English (US) |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 180-183 |
Number of pages | 4 |
Journal | Journal of Clinical Neuroscience |
Volume | 100 |
DOIs | |
State | Published - Jun 2022 |
Keywords
- Cerebral edema
- Clinical research
- Critical care
- Neurocritical care
- Neurological examination
- Nursing
- Pupil
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Surgery
- Neurology
- Clinical Neurology
- Physiology (medical)