Suppr超能文献

使用不同手持视力表进行近视力评估的比较验证研究。

A Comparative Validation Study of Near Visual Acuity Assessment Using Different Handheld Acuity Charts.

作者信息

Chen David Ziyou, Tham Yih-Chung, Shen Liang, Chee Soon-Phaik

机构信息

Department of Ophthalmology, National University Hospital, Singapore.

Centre for Innovation and Precision Eye Health, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore.

出版信息

Ophthalmol Sci. 2025 Apr 8;5(5):100790. doi: 10.1016/j.xops.2025.100790. eCollection 2025 Sep-Oct.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To develop a conversion table and compare the cross-validity of 3 types of widely utilized near vision charts: the ETDRS near chart, the N-notation chart, and the Rosenbaum chart.

DESIGN

A prospective, cross-sectional, comparative validation study.

PARTICIPANTS

Aged ≥40 years.

METHODS

A conversion table for the 3 types of near charts was created using objective character sizing based on vertical height captured using a surgical microscope with a 10× magnification. Eligible presbyopic patients had their near vision tested sequentially with 3 near charts in a randomized order.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Pearson correlation coefficient () for the relationship among the near visual acuity charts. The consistency between the different charts was evaluated by Bland-Altman diagrams.

RESULTS

A total of 204 participants (129 women, 63.2%) were recruited for the study (mean age, 58.9 ± 7.1 years). For correlation, ranged from 0.596 to 0.836 (all < 0.001). The Rosenbaum chart had the smallest range of difference against the ETDRS chart (standard deviation [SD] = 0.12), followed by the N-notation chart (SD = 0.15). Most of the converted logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) values from the N-notation and Rosenbaum charts were between 0.0 and 0.1 higher than the ETDRS logMAR equivalent (range: 0.07-0.11), with a tendency for both the N-notation and Rosenbaum charts to overestimate logMAR at more positive values.

CONCLUSIONS

We have developed a conversion table for 3 types of commonly used near vision charts. When compared with the ETDRS near chart, the Rosenbaum chart had a smaller range of difference than the N-notation chart. Both the Rosenbaum and N-notation charts tended to underestimate near vision at worse vision.

FINANCIAL DISCLOSURES

The author(s) have no proprietary or commercial interest in any materials discussed in this article.

摘要

目的

制定一个换算表,并比较3种广泛使用的近视力表的交叉效度:糖尿病视网膜病变早期治疗研究(ETDRS)近视力表、N视力记录法视力表和罗森鲍姆视力表。

设计

一项前瞻性、横断面、比较性验证研究。

参与者

年龄≥40岁。

方法

使用手术显微镜(放大倍数为10倍)获取垂直高度,基于客观字符大小为3种近视力表创建一个换算表。符合条件的老花眼患者按照随机顺序依次使用3种近视力表进行近视力测试。

主要观察指标

近视力表之间关系的皮尔逊相关系数()。通过布兰德-奥特曼图评估不同视力表之间的一致性。

结果

共招募了204名参与者(129名女性,占63.2%)参与本研究(平均年龄58.9±7.1岁)。相关性方面,范围为0.596至0.836(均<0.001)。罗森鲍姆视力表与ETDRS视力表相比差异范围最小(标准差[SD]=0.12),其次是N视力记录法视力表(SD=0.15)。N视力记录法视力表和罗森鲍姆视力表换算后的最小分辨角对数(logMAR)值大多比ETDRS视力表对应的logMAR值高0.0至0.1(范围:0.07 - 0.11),N视力记录法视力表和罗森鲍姆视力表在正值越大时都有高估logMAR的趋势。

结论

我们为3种常用的近视力表制定了一个换算表。与ETDRS近视力表相比,罗森鲍姆视力表的差异范围比N视力记录法视力表小。罗森鲍姆视力表和N视力记录法视力表在视力较差时都倾向于低估近视力。

财务披露

作者对本文讨论的任何材料均无所有权或商业利益。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/ac3a/12135357/60c544b61041/gr1.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验