Neuroanaesthesia & neurocritical care
A comparison between two indices derived from automated pupillometry devices
Authors' conclusion
In this cohort study, a significant statistical correlation between the measurements provided by two available pupilometers was found; however, NPi and QPI might not be clinically interchangeable.
Study context
- Population
- Adult (> 18 years) patients admitted to a neuro-ICU over a 6-month periodincluded in final analysis
- Participants
- 73 participants
- Exposure
- Neuroptics NPi-300 vs NeuroLight automated pupillometers
- Outcome
- Agreement and correlation between the two pupillometers (pupil diameter, pupillary reactivity, NPi vs QPI)
Methodological detailssingle-centre, observational
- Single-centre
- Observational
Main finding
As reported in the abstract
Agreement between devices (mean bias, 95% limits of agreement) and correlation
- Mean bias, pupil diameter
- 0.44 mm (95% LoA - 0.43 mm to 1.31 mm)
- Mean bias, pupillary reactivity
- 0.57% (95% LoA - 7.63% to 8.77%)
- Mean bias, Neurologic pupillary index (NPi) vs QPI
- - 0.82 (95% LoA - 2.70 to 1.05)
- Correlation, pupil diameter
- ρ = 0.91; 95% CI 0.86 to 0.95; p < 0.0001
- Correlation, pupil reactivity
- ρ = 0.92; 95% CI 0.87 to 0.95; p < 0.0001
- Correlation, NPi and QPI
- ρ = 0.75; 95% CI, 0.62-0.84; p < 0.0001
Observational data: associations, not effects.
Original publication
A comparison between two indices derived from automated pupillometry devices. J Clin Monit Comput. Published 29 August 2026. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →