No abstract

Purpose To evaluate the interexaminer and intraexaminer reliability of macular microperimetry using the microperimeter MP-1. Methods Participants: Fifteen healthy volunteers younger than 40 years of age (Group 1), 15 healthy subjects over 60 years (Group 2), and five patients with age-related macular degeneration (Group 3). Observation procedure: Two examiners (E1 and E2) measured, in random order, interexaminer (E2-E1a) reliability. Another examination was undergone by one of the examiners a week later to evaluate the intraexaminer (E1b-E1a) reliability. Main outcome measures: Macular sensitivity (mean threshold (decibel)) and stability of fixation were determined using MP1 microperimetry. Agreement was analysed by means of Bland-Altman plots and by the determination of the intraclass correlation coefficient. Results The interexaminer (E2-E1a) and the intraexaminer (E1b-E1a) differences in the mean threshold values were not statistically significant (P ¼ 0.850, 95% confidence Interval (CI) ¼ À0.265 to 0.319; P ¼ 0.246, 95% CI ¼ À0.099 to 0.375, respectively). Limits of agreement and intraclass correlation coefficients also showed good agreement in each group. Conclusions A good reliability was found for the mean threshold values in all the three groups, indicating examiner-independent measurements.

AAU patients exhibited a significant psychopathology towards depression, a reduction of general health and impairment of performing daily life tasks. Patients who were unsatisfied at work seemed to suffer even more. The results underline the importance of offering psychological support to the patients and providing information to patients and close social contacts.

Purpose Microperimetry is a useful instrument for evaluating sensitivity threshold due to retinal pathologies. The aim of the study is to assess the impact of different forms of cataract on microperimetry results. Methods In a prospective design, patients were recruited for cataract surgery at the Department of Ophthalmology, Medical University of Vienna. Exclusion criteria were any other ophthalmic disease except cataract, that is, macular pathology. Using the Lens Opacities Classification System III classification, patients were classified into four groups: nuclear, cortical, subcapsular posterior, and mixed cataract. Then patients underwent microperimetry: results were analyzed for magnitude of retinal sensitivity loss and correlated to the forms and density of the cataract. Results Mean density of cataract was LOCS 3.2-3.5 in the four groups. Differences were not statistically significant. The best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) was LogMAR 0.5±0.13 in nuclear, LogMAR 0.49 ± 0.21 in cortical, and LogMAR 0.58 ± 0.12 in mixed cataract patients, and significantly worse in patients with subcapsular posterior cataract (LogMAR 0.64±0.12). Microperimetry shows a mean sensitivity of 11.4-12.6 dB without significant group differences. The BCVA is correlated with microperimetry in patients with nuclear and cortical cataract. Density of cataract is highly correlated with microperimetry results in all groups. Conclusion The present study shows a good correlation of microperimetry results with the BCVA of patients with nuclear and cortical cataract. In patients with subcapsular posterior cataract, microperimetry results were better than estimated by BCVA. Density of cataract is highly correlated with macular sensitivity. A reduction of 1 dB in microperimetry per 1 posterior capsule opacification score increase can be estimated for these patients.