Demographics of the patients.

PurposeTo compare the efficacy and invasiveness of manual gonioscopy and automated 360-degree gonioscopy.MethodManual and automated gonioscopy were performed on 70 patients with glaucoma. Manual gonioscopy was performed by a glaucoma specialist and an ophthalmology resident, and automated gonioscopy (GS-1) was performed by orthoptists. We compared the examination time for acquiring gonioscopic images (GS-1: 16 directions; manual gonioscopy: 8 directions). Furthermore, we compared the pain and discomfort scores during the examination using the Individualized Numeric Rating Scale. Among the images acquired by automated gonioscopy, we also evaluated the percentages of acquired images that could be used to determine the angle opening condition.ResultsThe examination time was not significantly different between manual (80.2±28.7) and automated gonioscopy (94.7±82.8) (p = 0.105). The pain score of automated gonioscopy (0.22±0.59) was significantly lower than that of manual gonioscopy (0.55±1.11) (p = 0.025). The discomfort score was not significantly different between manual (1.34±1.90) and automated gonioscopy (1.06±1.50) (p = 0.165). Automated gonioscopy successfully acquired clear gonioscopic images in 93.4% of the total images.ConclusionAutomated gonioscopy is comparable in examination time and invasiveness to manual gonioscopy and may be useful for 360-degree iridocorneal angle evaluation.