LAUSR

ObjectiveMost retinopathy of prematurity screening involves an ophthalmologist performing indirect ophthalmoscopy, which can be stressful to infants. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the safety profile (using cardiopulmonary events as an indicator) of imaging infants with a non-contact retinal camera compared to examining them using indirect ophthalmoscopy.Study designProspective cohort study of 99 infants at a community hospital who were examined using indirect ophthalmoscopy and imaged using a non-contact retinal camera for retinopathy of prematurity. We evaluated the difference in the occurrence of safety events (i.e., clinically significant bradycardia, tachycardia, oxygen desaturation, or apnea) following the clinical examination versus retinal imaging.ResultSafety events occurred after 0.8% (n = 1) of imaging sessions and 5.8% (n = 18) of clinical examinations (mean difference = −0.055 (p = 0.015), favoring imaging).ConclusionRetinal imaging with a non-contact camera was well tolerated and less stressful to infants compared to indirect ophthalmoscopy by an ophthalmologist.