Errors Associated to Keratoconus Grading using Systems based on Corneal Power

Purpose: To analyze and define the possible errors that may be introduced in keratoconus classification when the keratometric corneal power is used in such classification. Materials and methods: Retrospective study including a total of 44 keratoconus eyes. A comprehensive ophthalmologic examination was performed in all cases, which included a corneal analysis with the Pentacam system (Oculus). Classical keratometric corneal power (Pk), Gaussian corneal power (Pc Gauss), True Net Power (TNP) (Gaussian power neglecting the corneal thickness effect), and an adjusted keratometric corneal power (Pkadj) (keratometric power considering a variable keratometric index) were calculated. All cases included in the study were classified according to five different classification systems: Alió-Shabayek, Amsler-Krumeich, Rabinowitz-McDonnell, collaborative longitudinal evaluation of keratoconus (CLEK), and McMahon. Results: When Pk and Pkadj were compared, differences in the type of grading of keratoconus cases was found in 13.6% of eyes when the Alió-Shabayek or the Amsler-Krumeich systems were used. Likewise, grading differences were observed in 22.7% of eyes with the Rabinowitz-McDonnell and McMahon classification systems and in 31.8% of eyes with the CLEK classification system. All reclassified cases using Pkadj were done in a less severe stage, indicating that the use of Pk may lead to the classification of a cornea as keratoconus, being normal. In general, the results obtained using Pkadj, Pc Gauss or the TNP were equivalent. Differences between Pkadj and Pc Gauss were within ± 0.7D. Conclusion: The use of classical keratometric corneal power may lead to incorrect grading of the severity of keratoconus, with a trend to a more severe grading.

Way of scoring by Spanish First Division volleyball teams in relation to winning/losing, home/away, final classification, and type of confrontation

The aim of this study was to assess the way volleyball teams score with regard to: whether or not they won the game, whether they were the home or away team, the level of the opposing teams, and the type of confrontation. The sample was composed of 118,083 plays from 794 men’s volleyball matches and 125,751 plays from 719 women’s matches of Spain’s first division clubs (from the 2002-2003 season to the 2006-2007 season). The variables studied were: the way points were obtained in each play, being the home or away team, the level of the teams, the result of the match, and the type of confrontation between the teams with regard to their level. The results demonstrate that for both men’s and women’s teams, the majority of the points were obtained in attack and by opponent errors. Differences were found with regard to the way points were obtained when winning or losing the match was taken into account as well as when considering the level of the teams. This paper discusses the differences found with regard to whether the team is home or visiting and the type of confrontation.