Kenneth C. ChernMichael A. Saidel - Review Questions in Ophthalmology

Thank you for purchasing this e-book. To receive special offers and news
about our latest products,
sign up below. Or visit LWW.com Acquisitions Editor: Ryan Shaw Product Development Editor: Kate Marshall Production Project Manager: David Orzechowski Design Coordinator: Teresa Mallon Manufacturing Coordinator: Beth Welsh Marketing Manager: Dan Dressler Prepress Vendor: S4Carlisle Publishing Services 3rd edition Copyright 2015 Wolters Kluwer Health Copyright 2005 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Copyright 1997 Williams & Wilkins All rights reserved. This book is protected by copyright. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, including as photocopies or scanned-in or other electronic copies, or utilized by any information storage and retrieval system without written permission from the copyright owner, except for brief quotations embodied in critical articles and reviews. government employees are not covered by the above-mentioned copyright. government employees are not covered by the above-mentioned copyright.

To request permission, please contact Wolters Kluwer Health at Two Commerce Square, 2001 Market Street, Philadelphia, PA 19103, via email at (products and services). 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

---

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Review questions in ophthalmology / [edited by] Kenneth C. Chern, Michael A. Saidel. Third edition. ; cm. ; cm.

ISBN 978-1-4511-9201-8 eISBN 978-1-4963-0823-8 I. Chern, Kenneth C., editor. II. Saidel, Michael, editor. [DNLM: 1. Eye DiseasesExamination Questions.

WW 18.2] RE49 617.70076dc23 2014029875

---

This work is provided as is, and the publisher disclaims any and all warranties, express or implied, including any warranties as to accuracy, comprehensiveness, or currency of the content of this work. This work is no substitute for individual patient assessment based upon healthcare professionals examination of each patient and consideration of, among other things, age, weight, gender, current or prior medical conditions, medication history, laboratory data and other factors unique to the patient. The publisher does not provide medical advice or guidance and this work is merely a reference tool. Healthcare professionals, and not the publisher, are solely responsible for the use of this work including all medical judgments and for any resulting diagnosis and treatments. Given continuous, rapid advances in medical science and health information, independent professional verification of medical diagnoses, indications, appropriate pharmaceutical selections and dosages, and treatment options should be made and healthcare professionals should consult a variety of sources. When prescribing medication, healthcare professionals are advised to consult the product information sheet (the manufacturers package insert) accompanying each drug to verify, among other things, conditions of use, warnings and side effects and identify any changes in dosage schedule or contraindications, particularly if the medication to be administered is new, infrequently used or has a narrow therapeutic range.

To the maximum extent permitted under applicable law, no responsibility is assumed by the publisher for any injury and/or damage to persons or property, as a matter of products liability, negligence law or otherwise, or from any reference to or use by any person of this work. LWW.com To our families Alok S. Bansal, MD Ophthalmologist Northern California Retina Vitreous Associates Mountain View, California Louis K. Chang, MD, PhD Ophthalmologist Northern California Retina Vitreous Associates Mountain View, California Kenneth C. Chern, MD, MBA Assistant Clinical Professor of Ophthalmology University of California, San Francisco Francis I. Proctor Foundation San Francisco, California Partner Peninsula Ophthalmology Group Burlingame, California Megan E.

Collins, MD Assistant Professor of Ophthalmology Wilmer Eye Institute Johns Hopkins Medicine Baltimore, Maryland David M. Hinkle, MD Clinical Assistant Professor of Ophthalmology Albany Medical College Albany, New York Rahul Khurana, MD Assistant Clinical Professor of Ophthalmology University of California, San Francisco San Francisco, California Ophthalmologist Northern California Retina Vitreous Associates Mountain View, California Marcus J. Ko, MD Nevada Centre Eye Plastic Surgery Reno, Nevada Edward Y. Koo, MD Associate Clinical Professor of Ophthalmology UCSF School of Medicine San Francisco, California Wendy W. Lee, MD Associate Professor of Clinical Ophthalmology and Dermatology Oculofacial Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery, Orbit, & Oncology Bascom Palmer Eye Institute University of Miami Miller School of Medicine Miami, Florida Marcus M. Marcet, MD Clinical Assistant Professor Department of Ophthalmology University of Hong Kong Hong Kong Jeffrey Nichols, MD Clinical Associate University of Chicago Chicago, Illinois Shuchi B.

Patel, MD Director of Glaucoma Services Loyola University Medical Center Maywood, Illinois Ashley Rohr, MD Ophthalmology Resident Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Science University of Chicago Medical Center Chicago, Illinois Michael A. Saidel, MD Clinical Assistant Professor Director of Cornea Service Department of Ophthalmology University of Chicago Chicago, Illinois QUESTIONS A diurnal curve of IOP taken in a patient revealed the following measurements: 13, 13, 15, 15, 15, 18, 23, 24 mmhg. What is the mean/mode/median IOP?

Mean	Mode	Median
A)	18.0	15.0	15.5
B)	18.0	16.0	15.0
C)	17.0	15.0	15.0
D)	17.0	16.0	15.5

You are preforming a new screening test for glaucoma on 100 patients. In reality, 15 of the patients have glaucoma and 85 of the patients do not. The screening test identifies 50 people with positive results and 50 people with negative (normal) results. Forty of those patients who had positive results do not have glaucoma, and five patients who truly have glaucoma have negative results on the screening test.

What is the number of false positives for this test? A)50 B)10 C)45 D)40 What are the sensitivity and specificity of this test? A)67%, 53% B)53%, 67% C)20%, 90% D)90%, 20% The null hypothesis for a study that you are conducting on a new test for monitoring diabetic blood glucose control is that there is not a significant difference in results compared with the conventional method of hemoglobin A1c testing. If we incorrectly reject the null hypothesis and conclude that there is a difference between the results of the two tests, this is an example of: A)type I error B)type II error C)sampling error D)power To properly analyze data to ensure that the conclusions are

Next page