Jones County Solid Waste Management Commission, June 30, 2001 & June 30, 2002

Other Audit Reports

Hardin County Sanitary Solid Waste Disposal Commission, June 30, 2002

Other Audit Reports

Delaware County Solid Waste Disposal Commission, June 30, 2001 & June 30, 2002

Other Audit Reports

Crawford County Area Solid Waste Agency Commission, June 30, 2001 & June 30, 2002

Other Audit Reports

Butler County Solid Waste Commission, June 30, 2001 & June 30, 2002

Other Audit Reports

Jones County Solid Waste Management Commission, June 30, 2002 & June 30, 2003

Other Audit Reports

Hardin County Sanitary Solid Waste Disposal Commission, June 30, 2003

Other Audit Reports

Shelby County Area Solid Waste Agency, June 30, 2002 & June 30, 2003

Other Audit Reports

Butler County Solid Waste Commission, June 30, 2002 & June 30, 2003

Other Audit Reports

Pocahontas County Solid Waste Commission, June 30, 2003

Other audit reports - Solid Waste Commission

Wayne-Ringgold-Decatur County Solid Waste Management Commission, June 30, 2002 & June 30, 2003

Other Audit Reports

Prairie Solid Waste Agency, June 30, 2003 and 2002

Audit report on the Prairie Solid Waste Agency, fiscal years ending June 30, 2003 and 2002.

Crawford County Area Solid Waste Agency Commission, June 30, 2003 and 2002

Audit report on the Crawford County Area Solid Waste Agency Commission, fiscal year ending June 30, 2003 and 2002.

Delaware County Solid Waste Disposal Commission, June 30, 2003 & 2002

Other Audit Report

Variability of the relative afferent pupillary defect.

PURPOSE: Afferent asymmetry of visual function is detectable in both normal and pathologic conditions. With a computerized test, we assessed the variability in measuring afferent asymmetry of the pupillary light reflex, that is, the relative afferent pupillary defect. METHODS: In ten normal subjects, pupillary responses to an alternating light stimulus were recorded with computerized infrared pupillography. The relative afferent pupillary defect for each test was determined by using a new computer analysis. The 95% confidence interval of each determination of relative afferent pupillary defect was used to represent the short-term fluctuation in its measurement. To optimize the test for clinical use, we studied the influence of stimulus intensity, duration, and number on the variability of the relative afferent pupillary defect. RESULTS: When the relative afferent pupillary defect was based on only a few light alternations (stimulus pairs), there was excessive variability in its measurement (95% confidence interval > 0.5 log units). With approximately 200 stimulus pairs, the 95% confidence interval was reduced to less than 0.1 log unit (relative afferent pupillary defect +/- 0.05 log unit). Also, there was less variability when the dark interval between alternating light stimulation was less than one second. CONCLUSIONS: Computerized infrared pupillography can standardize the alternating light test and minimize the error in quantifying a relative afferent pupillary defect. A reproducible relative afferent pupillary defect measurement is desirable for defining afferent injury and following the course of disease.