Leat Susan J, Yakobchuk-Stanger Cristina, Irving Elizabeth L
School of Optometry and Vision Science, University of Waterloo, Canada.
School of Optometry and Vision Science, University of Waterloo, Canada.
J Optom. 2020 Jan-Mar;13(1):41-49. doi: 10.1016/j.optom.2019.04.002. Epub 2019 May 9.
A novel type of acuity measurement, which we refer to as 'differential acuity', requires the observer to identify one unique target among three others which are identical. This is a proof of concept study aimed to determine if differential acuity is equivalent to standard measures of recognition acuity.
To create a range of visual acuity, vision was optically blurred in sixteen adults with normal visual acuity. Visual acuity was then measured with the differential acuity targets in both crowded and uncrowded format, and compared with standard ETDRS acuity or with singly presented letters and uncrowded letters were analysed separately.
The visual acuity results for crowded and uncrowded letters were analysed separately. Repeated measures analysis of variance showed that when a crowded Sloan C had to be differentiated from three crowded Os (CvsO), the results were not significantly different from ETDRS acuity or from naming one of four letters presented centrally (Name4) (p<0.05). Similar results were found for uncrowded letters - the C versus O and Name4 gave similar visual acuity. The 95% limits of agreement between the naming and C versus O differential acuity measures were between 0.17 and 0.27 logMAR.
From this proof of concept study we conclude that differential acuity gives similar results to the ETDRS chart in adults. We infer that the comparable but cognitively simpler differential visual acuity task could be applied in clinical settings for young children or patients with developmental delay who cannot respond by naming or matching.
一种新型的视力测量方法,我们称之为“辨别视力”,要求观察者从其他三个相同的目标中识别出一个独特的目标。这是一项概念验证研究,旨在确定辨别视力是否等同于识别视力的标准测量方法。
为了创建一系列视力水平,对16名视力正常的成年人进行光学模糊处理。然后分别以拥挤和不拥挤的形式用辨别视力目标测量视力,并与标准ETDRS视力或单独呈现的字母进行比较,不拥挤的字母单独分析。
分别分析了拥挤和不拥挤字母的视力结果。重复测量方差分析表明,当必须将拥挤的斯隆C与三个拥挤的O区分开(C对O)时,结果与ETDRS视力或说出中央呈现的四个字母之一(命名4)没有显著差异(p<0.05)。对于不拥挤的字母也发现了类似的结果——C对O和命名4给出了相似的视力。命名与C对O辨别视力测量之间的95%一致性界限在0.17至0.27 logMAR之间。
从这项概念验证研究中我们得出结论,辨别视力在成年人中给出的结果与ETDRS视力表相似。我们推断,可比但认知上更简单的辨别视力任务可应用于临床环境中无法通过命名或匹配做出反应的幼儿或发育迟缓患者。