Neumann A C, McCarty G R, Locke J, Cobb B
Neumann Eye Institute, DeLand, Florida 32720.
J Cataract Refract Surg. 1988 Mar;14(2):212-6. doi: 10.1016/s0886-3350(88)80098-1.
We evaluated five commercially available glare testers to determine how accurately each device predicted outdoor Snellen acuity in cataract patients. Predicted outdoor Snellen acuity was compared to actual Snellen outdoor acuity for the Miller-Nadler glare tester, the brightness acuity tester (BAT), the InnoMed true vision analyzer (TVA), the VisTech VCT 8000, and the EyeCon 5. All five devices were evaluated in a single series of eyes. We ranked the five glare testers as follows based upon their ability to predict outdoor Snellen acuity within one Snellen line: (1) BAT (73%), (2) TVA (69%), (3) VisTech VCT 8000 (56%), (4) Miller-Nadler (47%), and (5) EyeCon 5 (15%). All five devices were also evaluated for their capacity to provide false negative or false positive results and for testing time per eye, test difficulty level for the patient, versatility, upgrading capacity, examining room adaptability, and price. We concluded that glare testing of cataract patients is necessary to measure visual disability and that glare testing devices vary in their ability to predict outdoor vision.
我们评估了五款市售的眩光测试仪，以确定每款设备预测白内障患者户外斯内伦视力的准确程度。将米勒 - 纳德勒眩光测试仪、亮度视力测试仪（BAT）、英诺美真视力分析仪（TVA）、VisTech VCT 8000和EyeCon 5的预测户外斯内伦视力与实际户外斯内伦视力进行了比较。对这五款设备在同一组眼睛中进行了评估。基于它们在一个斯内伦视力行内预测户外斯内伦视力的能力，我们将这五款眩光测试仪排名如下：（1）BAT（73%），（2）TVA（69%），（3）VisTech VCT 8000（56%），（4）米勒 - 纳德勒（47%），以及（5）EyeCon 5（15%）。还对这五款设备产生假阴性或假阳性结果的能力、每只眼睛的测试时间、患者的测试难度水平、多功能性、升级能力、检查室适应性和价格进行了评估。我们得出结论，对白内障患者进行眩光测试对于测量视觉残疾是必要的，并且眩光测试设备在预测户外视力的能力方面存在差异。
