Objective: To determine if any significant difference exists between endoscopic videos captured with a mobile adaptor and videos captured with a traditional tower.
Study design: Prospective controlled blinded comparison of mobile endoscopic videos captured through 2 methods.
Methods: Thirty randomly selected patients underwent video endoscopy with both mobile and video tower recording methods. Sixty videos were edited into a series of 10-second clips. Thirteen otolaryngology staff and residents rated the video quality and provided a diagnosis for each video.
Results: We found no significant difference in the video quality ratings between mobile and tower videos (mean difference, -0.07; P < .37). Similarly, we found no significant difference in the observers' diagnostic accuracy (mean difference, 1.54%; P < .686).
Conclusion: With adequate power, our study was unable to demonstrate a difference between mobile adapter videos and tower videos. Our findings suggest that mobile adapter videos may reasonably be used in lieu of tower videos in clinical practice.
Keywords: ClearScope; cell phone video; endoscope; mHealth; mobile endoscopy; prospective.
© American Academy of Otolaryngology—Head and Neck Surgery Foundation 2016.