Woodhouse J Margaret, Morjaria Shreya A, Adler Paul M
School of Optometry & Vision Sciences, Cardiff University, Redwood Building, King Edward VII Avenue, Cardiff CF10 3NB, UK.
Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 2007 Jan;27(1):54-9. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-1313.2006.00454.x.
Preferential looking (PL), as a technique for assessing visual acuity, was designed for use with young infants. There are occasions when a practitioner may need to use a PL test with an adult who is unable to participate in acuity measures with conventional optotype tests (such as an adult with learning disabilities, stroke damage or dementia). In preparation for the development of an adult-appropriate PL test, this study compared scores with the Cardiff Acuity Test (CAT, which was designed as a PL test) and a standard LogMAR-based test, the Lea chart. One hundred and one adults with learning disabilities, attending vision screening at Special Olympics, took part in acuity measures with both tests. Athletes subsequently found to have uncorrected refractive errors were excluded and analysis was confined to 72 athletes. There was no significant difference in mean acuity with the two tests, but CAT tended to overestimate scores for poorer acuities. CAT was less sensitive than the Lea chart to interocular acuity differences. Although CAT may be a successful way to assess acuity in patients unable to participate in conventional acuity tests, the practitioner should be cautious in interpreting results. There is the potential with CAT to overestimate acuity and to miss small interocular differences, so criteria for determining 'abnormality' may need to be adjusted.
优先注视法(PL)作为一种评估视力的技术,是为幼儿设计的。在某些情况下,从业者可能需要对无法通过传统视标测试进行视力测量的成年人(如患有学习障碍、中风损伤或痴呆症的成年人)使用PL测试。为了准备开发适合成年人的PL测试,本研究将分数与加的夫视力测试(CAT,它被设计为一种PL测试)和基于标准LogMAR的测试(Lea视力表)进行了比较。101名参加特殊奥运会视力筛查的学习障碍成年人参与了这两项测试的视力测量。随后被发现有未矫正屈光不正的运动员被排除在外,分析仅限于72名运动员。两项测试的平均视力没有显著差异,但CAT往往会高估较差视力的分数。与Lea视力表相比,CAT对两眼间视力差异的敏感度较低。虽然CAT可能是评估无法参与传统视力测试患者视力的一种成功方法,但从业者在解释结果时应谨慎。CAT有可能高估视力并遗漏两眼间的微小差异,因此可能需要调整确定“异常”的标准。