Zeri Fabrizio, Calcatelli Paolo, Funaro Eleonora, Martelli Marialuisa, Naroo Shehzad A
Ophthalmic Research Group, School of Life and Health Sciences, Aston University, Birmingham, B4 7ET, UK.
Istituto Ottico Carli, L'Aquila, Italy.
Int Ophthalmol. 2018 Aug;38(4):1473-1484. doi: 10.1007/s10792-017-0609-0. Epub 2017 Jun 21.
To evaluate the accuracy and repeatability of a computer-generated Pelli-Robson test displayed on liquid crystal display (LCD) systems compared to a standard Pelli-Robson chart.
Two different randomized crossover experiments were carried out for two different LCD systems for 32 subjects: 6 females and 10 males (40.5 ± 13.0 years) and 9 females and 7 males (27.8 ± 12.2 years), respectively, in the first and second experiment. Two repeated measurements were taken with the printed Pelli-Robson test and with the LCDs at 1 and 3 m. To test LCD reliability, measurements were repeated after 1 week.
In Experiment 1, contrast sensitivity (CS) measured with LCD1 resulted significantly higher than Pelli-Robson both at 1 and at 3 m of about 0.20 log 1/C in both eyes (p < 0.01). Bland-Altman plots showed a proportional bias for LCD1 measures. LCD1 measurements showed reasonable repeatability: ICC was 0.83 and 0.65 at 1 and 3 m, respectively. In Experiment 2, CS measured with LCD2 resulted significantly lower than Pelli-Robson both at 1 and at 3 m of about 0.10 log 1/C in both eyes (p < 0.01). Bland-Altman plots did not show any proportional bias for LCD2 measures. LCD2 measurements showed sufficient repeatability: ICC resulted 0.51 and 0.65 at 1 and 3 m, respectively.
Computer-generated versions of Pelli-Robson test, displayed on LCD systems, do not provide accurate results compared to classic Pelli-Robson printed version. Clinicians should consider that Pelli-Robson computer-generated versions could be non-interchangeable to the printed version.
评估与标准佩利-罗布森图表相比，在液晶显示器（LCD）系统上显示的计算机生成的佩利-罗布森测试的准确性和可重复性。
针对两种不同的LCD系统，对32名受试者进行了两项不同的随机交叉实验：第一项实验中有6名女性和10名男性（40.5±13.0岁），第二项实验中有9名女性和7名男性（27.8±12.2岁）。使用印刷版佩利-罗布森测试以及在1米和3米处的LCD进行了两次重复测量。为测试LCD的可靠性，1周后重复测量。
在实验1中，使用LCD1测量的对比敏感度（CS）在双眼1米和3米处均显著高于佩利-罗布森测试，约高0.20 log 1/C（p<0.01）。布兰德-奥特曼图显示LCD1测量存在比例偏差。LCD1测量显示出合理的可重复性：在1米和3米处的组内相关系数（ICC）分别为0.83和0.65。在实验2中，使用LCD2测量的CS在双眼1米和3米处均显著低于佩利-罗布森测试，约低0.10 log 1/C（p<0.01）。布兰德-奥特曼图未显示LCD2测量存在任何比例偏差。LCD2测量显示出足够的可重复性：在1米和3米处的ICC分别为0.51和0.65。
与经典的印刷版佩利-罗布森测试相比，在LCD系统上显示的计算机生成版本的佩利-罗布森测试不能提供准确结果。临床医生应考虑计算机生成版本的佩利-罗布森测试可能与印刷版本不可互换。
