Repeatability of contrast sensitivity testing in patients with age-related macular degeneration, glaucoma, and cataract

Abstract

Approved by the following research ethics committee: Canakkale Onsekiz Mart University (#050. 99-151). ABSTRACTPurpose: To analyze the intrasession and intersession repeatability of contrast sensitivity (CS) measurements in patients with glaucoma, cataract, or age-related macular degeneration (AMD) and healthy controls. Methods: CS measurements were performed using the OPTEC-Functional Vision Analyzer (FVA), which uses a standardized and closed (view-in) system. Measurements for patients with glaucoma, cataract, or AMD and healthy controls were repeated within 30 minutes (intrasession) and during two sessions (intersession), separated by one week to one month. Test-retest reliability and correlation were measured using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and coefficient of repeatability (COR). Results: Ninety subjects (90 eyes) with visual acuity of 0.17 logMAR or higher in the cataract group or 0.00 logMAR in the other groups were included. During the first session, the ICC values were 0.87, 0.90, 0.76, and 0.69, and COR values were 0.24, 0.20, 0.38, and 0.25 for the control, glaucoma, cataract, and AMD groups, respectively. The reliability scores significantly improved during the second session, except in the glaucoma group. There was an acceptable floor effect and no ceiling effect at higher frequencies in the glaucoma and AMD groups. Conclusion: In subjects with good visual acuity, the FVA system is useful for evaluating CS and demonstrates good repeatability, as shown by ICC and COR. Because there is no ceiling effect, this system is beneficial for evaluation of early changes in CS, particularly in patients with glaucoma or AMD.Keywords: Macular degeneration; Contrast sensitivity; Glaucoma; Age effect; Repro ducibility of results , glaucoma, catarata e AMD foram, respectivamente, ICC 0,87; 0,90; 0,76; 0,69, e COR 0,24; 0,20; 0,38; 0,25 RESUMO Objetivo: Analisar a reprodutibilidade intrassessão e intersessão das medidas de sen sibilidade ao contraste (CS) em pacientes com degeneração macular relacionada à idade (AMD), glaucoma e catarata. Método: As medidas de CS foram feitas pelo OPTEC-Funcional Visão Analyzer (FVA), que utiliza um sistema padronizado e fechado de avaliação da acuidade visual. Medidas em pacientes com AMD, glaucoma, catarata e nos controles saudáveis foram repetidas no prazo de 30 minutos (intrassessão) em duas visitas (intersessão), separadas por uma semana a um mês. A confiabilidade e correlação teste-reteste foram calculados por meio do coeficiente de correlação intraclasse (ICC) e coeficiente de reprodutibilidade (COR). Resultados: Noventa olhos de 90 indivíduos foram recrutados com acuidade visual de 0,17 logMAR ou melhor em catarata e 0,00 logMAR nos outros grupos. A confiabilidade da CS na primeira visita dos grupos normal

Case Report: Visual Rehabilitation in Hemianopia Patients. Home-Based Visual Rehabilitation in Patients With Hemianopia Consecutive to Brain Tumor Treatment: Feasibility and Potential Effectiveness

“…Visual assessments performed at the clinic comparing baseline (pre-treatment) and week 7 (post-treatment) demonstrated an enhanced CS in both left ( Oculus Sinister , OS) and right ( Oculus Dexter , OD) eyes. CS improved at 2 cyc/deg from 1.65 to 2.1 logits [COR ±0.24 logits ( 30 )] in OS ( Figure 3A ). CS increased at 0.5, 2, and 6 cyc/deg for OD from 1.54 to 1.85 logits, from 1.85 to 2.1 logits, and from 1.6 to 1.95 logits [COR ±0.24 logits ( 30 )], respectively ( Figure 3A ).…”

“…CS improved at 2 cyc/deg from 1.65 to 2.1 logits [COR ±0.24 logits ( 30 )] in OS ( Figure 3A ). CS increased at 0.5, 2, and 6 cyc/deg for OD from 1.54 to 1.85 logits, from 1.85 to 2.1 logits, and from 1.6 to 1.95 logits [COR ±0.24 logits ( 30 )], respectively ( Figure 3A ). Visual field analysis revealed that the number of points seen in the binocular Esterman field of vision test increased from 66 points seen at baseline to 69 at week 3 and 73 at week 7 with some reorganization (black circles indicate loss of points, red squares indicate acquired points, net change: +7 points, all in the blind left hemifield, +5.8% from baseline, Table 2 , Figure 3B ).…”

“…Visual assessments performed at week 3 and week 6 were compared to baseline. CS improved at 4 and 6 cyc/deg from 1.74 to 2.23 logits and from 1.41 to 1.95 logits [COR ±0.24 logits ( 30 )], respectively, in OS ( Figure 4B ). CS improved at 0.5 and 6 cyc/deg for OD from 1.54 to 1.85 logits and from 1.6 to 1.95 logits [COR ±0.24 logits ( 30 )], respectively ( Figure 4A ).…”

Measuring the Contrast Sensitivity Function Using the qCSF Method With 10 Digits

“…The contrast sensitivity function (CSF) provides a comprehensive assessment of spatial vision at a variety of spatial frequencies, 1 and is used to evaluate and screen a variety of visual disorders. 2 – 8 The conventional CSF measurement in the laboratory is very time-consuming, 9 while the clinically available chart for CSF assessment, such as the Vistech chart or Functional Acuity Contrast Test (FACT) exhibited very poor test–retest reliability. 10 , 11 Recently, Lesmes et al 12 developed the Bayesian adaptive quick CSF (qCSF) method to efficiently measure the CSF with high precision and accuracy.…”

Increased Equivalent Input Noise in Glaucomatous Central Vision: Is it Due to Undersampling of Retinal Ganglion Cells?

“…[7][8][9][10][11] Particularly, despite normal visual acuity, foveal contrast sensitivity was found to be significantly impaired even in early stages of glaucoma compared with normal cohorts. [12][13][14][15][16] Contrast sensitivity, the ability to detect differences in contrast, is a fundamental building block of human pattern vision, and thus affects a wide range of everyday visual functions, such as reading, [17][18][19] object/face recognition, 20,21 gait, 19,22 and driving 23,24 (also see a review 25 ). Contrast information (i.e., the intensity difference between the light and dark regions of visual space) is first encoded in center-surround RGCs 26 and further processed in the downstream cortical areas.…”