Advertisement

Neurocritical Care

, Volume 24, Issue 2, pp 251–257 | Cite as

Interrater Reliability of Pupillary Assessments

  • DaiWai M. Olson
  • Sonja Stutzman
  • Ciji Saju
  • Margaret Wilson
  • Weidan Zhao
  • Venkatesh Aiyagari
Original Article

Abstract

Background

Subjective scoring of pupil reactivity is a fundamental element of the neurological examination for which the pupillometer provides an objective measure.

Methods

This single-blinded observational study examined interrater reliability of pupil exam findings between two practitioners and between practitioners and a pupillometer.

Results

From 2329 paired assessments, the interrater reliability between practitioners was only moderate for pupil size (k = 0.54), shape (k = 0.62), and reactivity (k = 0.40). Only 33.3 % of pupils scored as non-reactive by practitioners were scored as non-reactive by pupillometry.

Conclusions

Despite the strong emphasis placed on the traditional pupil examination, especially for patients with a neurological illness, there is limited interrater reliability for subjective scoring of pupillary assessments. Thus, the use of automated pupillometers should be examined as a potential method to increase the reliability of measuring of pupil reactivity.

Keywords

Pupillometry Interrater reliability Neurological illness Traumatic brain injury Pupil assessment 

Notes

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Funding

The study received no direct funding. Pupillometers were loaned to the university by Neuroptics Inc., at no cost for the duration of the study.

References

  1. 1.
    Greenberg MS, Arredondo N. Handbook of neurosurgery. 6th ed. Lakeland: Greenberg Graphics, Thieme Medical Publishers; 2006.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    AANN. AANN Core curriculum for neuroscience nursing. 5th ed. Glenview: American Association of Neurosciene Nurses; 2010.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Campbell WW. DeJong’s The Neurologic examination. 7th ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2005.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Plum F, Posner JB. The diagnosis of stupor and coma. Ed. 3. ed. Philadelphia: Davis; 1980.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Blumenfeld H. Neuroanatomy through clinical cases. Sunderland: Sinauer; 2002.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Marmarou A, Lu J, Butcher I, et al. Prognostic value of the Glasgow Coma Scale and pupil reactivity in traumatic brain injury assessed pre-hospital and on enrollment: an IMPACT analysis. J Neurotrauma. 2007;24(2):270–80.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Narayan RK, Greenberg RP, Miller JD, et al. Improved confidence of outcome prediction in severe head injury. A comparative analysis of the clinical examination, multimodality evoked potentials, CT scanning, and intracranial pressure. J Neurosurg. 1981;54(6):751–62.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chesnut RM, Gautille T, Blunt BA, Klauber MR, Marshall LE. The localizing value of asymmetry in pupillary size in severe head injury: relation to lesion type and location. Neurosurgery. 1994;34(5):840–5 (discussion 845–846).CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Majdan M, Steyerberg EW, Nieboer D, Mauritz W, Rusnak M, Lingsma HF. Glasgow coma scale motor score and pupillary reaction to predict six-month mortality in patients with traumatic brain injury: comparison of field and admission assessment. J Neurotrauma. 2015;32(2):101–8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Braakman R, Gelpke GJ, Habbema JD, Maas AI, Minderhoud JM. Systematic selection of prognostic features in patients with severe head injury. Neurosurgery. 1980;6(4):362–70.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ritter AM, Muizelaar JP, Barnes T, et al. Brain stem blood flow, pupillary response, and outcome in patients with severe head injuries. Neurosurgery. 1999;44(5):941–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Tien HC, Cunha JR, Wu SN, et al. Do trauma patients with a Glasgow Coma Scale score of 3 and bilateral fixed and dilated pupils have any chance of survival? J Trauma. 2006;60(2):274–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Manley GT, Larson MD. Infrared pupillometry during uncal herniation. J Neurosurg Anesthesiol. 2002;14(3):223–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Goebert HW Jr. Head injury associated with a dilated pupil. Surg Clin North Am. 1970;50(2):427–32.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Clusmann H, Schaller C, Schramm J. Fixed and dilated pupils after trauma, stroke, and previous intracranial surgery: management and outcome. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2001;71(2):175–81.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Andrews BT, Pitts LH. Functional recovery after traumatic transtentorial herniation. Neurosurgery. 1991;29(2):227–31.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sakas DE, Bullock MR, Teasdale GM. One-year outcome following craniotomy for traumatic hematoma in patients with fixed dilated pupils. J Neurosurg. 1995;82(6):961–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Schallenberg M, Bangre V, Steuhl KP, Kremmer S, Selbach JM. Comparison of the Colvard, Procyon, and Neuroptics pupillometers for measuring pupil diameter under low ambient illumination. J Refract Surg. 2010;26(2):134–43.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Zafar SF, Suarez JI. Automated pupillometer for monitoring the critically ill patient: a critical appraisal. J Crit Care. 2014;29(4):599–603.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Meeker M, Du R, Bacchetti P, et al. Pupil examination: validity and clinical utility of an automated pupillometer. J Neurosci Nurs. 2005;37(1):34–40.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Fountas KN, Kapsalaki EZ, Machinis TG, Boev AN, Robinson JS, Troup EC. Clinical implications of quantitative infrared pupillometry in neurosurgical patients. Neurocrit Care. 2006;5(1):55–60.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Munoz Negrete FJ, Rebolleda G. Automated evaluation of the pupil. Arch Soc Esp Oftalmol. 2013;88(4):125–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kramer CL, Rabinstein AA, Wijdicks EF, Hocker SE. Neurologist versus machine: is the pupillometer better than the naked eye in detecting pupillary reactivity. Neurocrit Care. 2014;21(2):309–11.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Witting MD, Goyal D. Interrater reliability in pupillary measurement. Ann Emerg Med. 2003;41(6):832–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Wilson SF, Amling JK, Floyd SD, McNair ND. Determining interrater reliability of nurses’ assessments of pupillary size and reaction. J Neurosci Nurs. 1988;20(3):189–92.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics. 1977;33(1):159–74.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Gwet KL. Inter-rater reliability using SAS : a practical guide for nominal, ordinal, and interval data. Gaithersburg: Advanced Analytics, LLC; 2010.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Viera AJ, Garrett JM. Understanding interobserver agreement: the kappa statistic. Fam Med. 2005;37(5):360–3.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Chen Y, Kardon RH. Studying the effect of iris mechanics on the pupillary light reflex using brimonidine-induced anisocoria. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2013;54(4):2951–8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    McHugh ML. Interrater reliability: the kappa statistic. Biochem Med (Zagreb). 2012;22(3):276–82.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Chen JW, Gombart ZJ, Rogers S, Gardiner SK, Cecil S, Bullock RM. Pupillary reactivity as an early indicator of increased intracranial pressure: the introduction of the Neurological Pupil index. Surg Neurol Int. 2011;2:82.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Song Z, Zheng W, Zhu H, et al. Prediction of coma and anisocoria based on computerized tomography findings in patients with supratentorial intracerebral hemorrhage. Clin Neurol Neurosurg. 2012;114(6):634–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Du R, Meeker M, Bacchetti P, Larson MD, Holland MC, Manley GT. Evaluation of the portable infrared pupillometer. Neurosurgery. 2005;57(1):198–203 (discussion 198–203).CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • DaiWai M. Olson
    • 1
  • Sonja Stutzman
    • 1
  • Ciji Saju
    • 1
  • Margaret Wilson
    • 1
  • Weidan Zhao
    • 1
  • Venkatesh Aiyagari
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Neurology & NeurotherapeuticsThe University of Texas Southwestern Medical CenterDallasUSA
  2. 2.Department of Neurological SurgeryThe University of Texas Southwestern Medical CenterDallasUSA

Personalised recommendations