Polevoy Claudia, Muckle Gina, Séguin Jean R, Ouellet Emmanuel, Saint-Amour Dave
Research Center, CHU Sainte-Justine, Montreal, Canada.
Department of Psychology, Université du Québec à Montréal, C.P. 8888, Succ. Centre-Ville, Montreal, QC, H3C 2P8, Canada.
Doc Ophthalmol. 2017 Apr;134(2):99-110. doi: 10.1007/s10633-017-9576-z. Epub 2017 Feb 20.
Behavioral and electrophysiological methods for visual acuity estimation typically correlate well in children and adult populations, but this relationship remains unclear in infants, particularly during the second half of the first year of life. It has been suggested that the agreement between both methods mostly relies on age and/or subjective acuity factors. The present study aimed at comparing acuity thresholds obtained with both approaches in a sample of healthy infants in a relatively narrow age range, that is 6-10 months old.
Acuity thresholds were assessed in 61 healthy infants aged between 6 and 10 months using the Teller acuity cards (TAC) and sweep visual evoked potentials (sVEP). The TAC stimuli (stationary vertical gratings displayed on laminated cards) ranged from 0.31 to 38 cycles per degree (cpd). The TAC acuity threshold was estimated according to the highest spatial frequency scored by the experimenter as seen by the infant. The sVEP stimuli (high-contrast vertical gratings counter-phased at 12 reversals/s) ranged from 13.5 to 1 cpd. sVEP were recorded at Oz and acuity threshold was estimated using regression linear fitting.
Considering the entire sample, sVEP acuity thresholds (8.97 ± 2.52 cpd) were significantly better than TAC scores (5.58 ± 2.95 cpd), although the difference was within 1 octave for 64% of the infants. Neither Pearson nor intra-class correlations between the two methods were significant (0.18 and 0.03, respectively). While age at assessment was not related to any dependent variable (TAC, sVEP, sVEP-TAC difference score), subjective (behavioral) acuity was found to underlie the difference between the two methods. The difference between sVEP and TAC scores decreased as a function of subjective acuity, and at the highest subjective acuity level (>10 cpd), TAC acuity slightly exceeded sVEP acuity.
The superiority of sVEP acuity often reported in the literature was evident in our infant sample when subjective acuity (TAC) was low or moderate, but not when it was high (>10 cpd). The relationship between the two estimation methods was not dependent on age, but on subjective acuity.
用于视力估计的行为学和电生理学方法在儿童和成人中通常具有良好的相关性,但在婴儿中这种关系仍不明确,尤其是在出生后第一年的下半年。有人提出这两种方法之间的一致性主要取决于年龄和/或主观视力因素。本研究旨在比较在相对较窄年龄范围(即6至10个月大)的健康婴儿样本中,用这两种方法获得的视力阈值。
使用泰勒视力卡片(TAC)和扫描视觉诱发电位(sVEP)对61名年龄在6至10个月的健康婴儿进行视力阈值评估。TAC刺激(显示在层压卡片上的静止垂直光栅)范围为每度0.31至38周/度(cpd)。TAC视力阈值根据实验者记录的婴儿能看到的最高空间频率来估计。sVEP刺激(以12次反转/秒反相的高对比度垂直光栅)范围为13.5至1 cpd。在Oz处记录sVEP,并使用回归线性拟合估计视力阈值。
考虑整个样本,sVEP视力阈值(8.97±2.52 cpd)显著优于TAC评分(5.58±2.95 cpd),尽管64%的婴儿两者差异在1倍频程内。两种方法之间的皮尔逊相关性和组内相关性均不显著(分别为0.18和0.03)。虽然评估时的年龄与任何因变量(TAC、sVEP、sVEP - TAC差异分数)均无关联,但发现主观(行为)视力是两种方法差异的基础。sVEP和TAC评分之间的差异随着主观视力的变化而减小,在最高主观视力水平(>10 cpd)时,TAC视力略超过sVEP视力。
当主观视力(TAC)较低或中等时,文献中常报道的sVEP视力优势在我们的婴儿样本中很明显,但当主观视力较高(>10 cpd)时则不然。两种估计方法之间的关系不取决于年龄,而是取决于主观视力。