Suppr超能文献

通过三种不同方法对学龄前儿童进行视力测量的比较:Lea符号、密集Lea符号、Snellen E视力表。

Comparison of visual acuity measurements via three different methods in preschool children: Lea symbols, crowded Lea symbols, Snellen E chart.

作者信息

Inal Asli, Ocak Osman Bulut, Aygit Ebru Demet, Yilmaz Ihsan, Inal Berkay, Taskapili Muhittin, Gokyigit Birsen

机构信息

University of Health Sciences Prof. Dr. N. Reşat Belger Beyoglu Eye Research and Training Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey.

University of Health Sciences Okmeydanı Research and Training Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey.

出版信息

Int Ophthalmol. 2018 Aug;38(4):1385-1391. doi: 10.1007/s10792-017-0596-1. Epub 2017 Jun 20.

Abstract

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to compare three different methods to measure visual acuity (VA) in healthy and amblyopic preschool children: a Snellen E chart (SE), a single Lea symbols (SLS), and a crowded Lea symbols (CLS).

METHODS

Seventy-eight eyes of 54 patients (28 females, 26 males) were included in this cross-sectional, comparative study. The control group consisted of 30 healthy cases, and the amblyopic group consisted of 24 patients with amblyopia. Best-corrected VA (BCVA) measurements with SLS, CLS, and SE were compared in control eyes (CE), amblyopic eyes (AE), and fellow eyes (FE) separately.

RESULTS

The mean age of the cohort was 5.7 ± 0.7 years (range 5-7 years). The mean refractive error was +1.02 ± 0.36 D (diopter, spherical equivalent) in CE, +5.59 ± 2.45 D in AE, and +3.96 ± 2.38 D in FE. The median BCVA (logMAR) was (in order of SLS, CLS, and SE) 0.00 [interquartile range (IQR) 0.10], 0.10 (IQR 0.10), 0.00 (IQR 0.10) in CE, 0.25 (IQR 0.33), 0.35 (IQR 0.30), 0.25 (IQR 0.38) in AE, and 0.10 (IQR 0.08), 0.10 (IQR 0.00), 0.10 (IQR 0.10) in FE. There was no statistically significant difference between the three methods in terms of the CE or FE (p > 0.05). In contrast, there was a statistically significant difference in AE (p < 0.05). The mean VA measurement with SLS was higher compared with CLS in AE. A positive and strong correlation between the three charts was found in all of the groups (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

We found SLS, CLS, and SE to be consistent: all three methods can be used to obtain measurements of VA in healthy and amblyopic preschool children.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在比较三种不同方法测量健康及弱视学龄前儿童的视力(VA):斯内伦E字视力表(SE)、单个利雅符号(SLS)和拥挤利雅符号(CLS)。

方法

本横断面比较研究纳入了54例患者(28例女性,26例男性)的78只眼。对照组由30例健康病例组成,弱视组由24例弱视患者组成。分别比较对照组眼(CE)、弱视眼(AE)和对侧眼(FE)使用SLS、CLS和SE测量的最佳矫正视力(BCVA)。

结果

该队列的平均年龄为5.7±0.7岁(范围5 - 7岁)。CE的平均屈光不正为+1.02±0.36 D(屈光度,球镜等效值),AE为+5.59±2.45 D,FE为+3.96±2.38 D。CE的BCVA中位数(logMAR)(按SLS、CLS和SE顺序)为0.00[四分位数间距(IQR)0.10]、0.10(IQR 0.10)、0.00(IQR 0.10),AE为0.25(IQR 0.33)、0.35(IQR 0.30)、0.25(IQR 0.38),FE为0.10(IQR 0.08)、0.10(IQR 0.00)、0.10(IQR 0.10)。三种方法在CE或FE方面无统计学显著差异(p>0.05)。相比之下,AE存在统计学显著差异(p<0.05)。AE中SLS测量的平均视力高于CLS。所有组中三种视力表之间均存在显著正相关(p<0.001)。

结论

我们发现SLS、CLS和SE具有一致性:这三种方法均可用于测量健康及弱视学龄前儿童的视力。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验