Development of a Forced Choice Photographic Questionnaire for Photic Phenomena and Its Testing – Repeatability, Reliability and Validity

Aslam, Tariq; Dhillon, Baljean; Tallentire, Victoria Ruth; Patton, Niall; Aspinal, P.

doi:10.1159/000080944

Cited by 13 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It occurs due to optical non-conformities in the optical path such as cataract or optical boundaries, such as following simultaneous image creating multifocal IOL implantation (Leyland and Zinicola, 2003;Wilkins et al, 2013). The majority of studies examining dysphotopsia use various subjective questioning in the form of verbal interviews (Jacobi et al, 2003;Marques and Ferreira, 2015), bespoke questionnaires (Kohnen et al, 2006), a validated questionnaire (Aslam et al, 2004a;Aslam et al, 2004b) or through subject-initiated complaints (Shoji and Shimizu, 1996). An alternative method is to use graphics depicting visual demonstrations of different types of dysphotopsia allowing the subject to indicate which is most representative of what they perceive (Hunkeler et al, 2002;McAlinden et al, 2010).…”

Section: 2mentioning

confidence: 99%

Presbyopia: Effectiveness of correction strategies

Wolffsohn

Davies

2019

Progress in Retinal and Eye Research

216

178

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Presbyopia is a global problem affecting over a billion people worldwide. The prevalence of unmanaged presbyopia is as high as 50% of those over 50 years of age in developing world populations, due to a lack of awareness and accessibility to affordable treatment, and is even as high as 34% in developed countries. Definitions of presbyopia are inconsistent and varied, so we propose a redefinition that states "presbyopia occurs when the physiologically normal age-related reduction in the eye's focusing range reaches a point, when optimally corrected for distance vision, that the clarity of vision at near is insufficient to satisfy an individual's requirements". Strategies for correcting presbyopia include separate optical devices located in front of the visual system (reading glasses) or a change in the direction of gaze to view through optical zones of different optical powers (bifocal, trifocal or progressive addition spectacle lenses), monovision (with contact lenses, intraocular lenses, laser refractive surgery and corneal collagen shrinkage), simultaneous images (with contact lenses, intraocular lenses and corneal inlays), pinhole depth of focus expansion (with intraocular lenses, corneal inlays and pharmaceuticals), crystalline lens softening (with lasers or pharmaceuticals) or restored dynamics (with 'accommodating' intraocular lenses, scleral expansion techniques and ciliary muscle electrostimulation); these strategies may be applied differently to the two eyes to optimise the range of clear focus for an individual's task requirements and minimise adverse visual effects. However, none fully overcome presbyopia in all patients. While the restoration of natural accommodation or an equivalent remains elusive, guidance is given on presbyopic correction evaluation techniques.

show abstract

Section: 2mentioning

confidence: 99%

Presbyopia: Effectiveness of correction strategies

Wolffsohn

Davies

2019

Progress in Retinal and Eye Research

216

178

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Pseudophakic dysphotopsia may involve aberrant areas of light such as bright arcs, dark arcs and central flash. Separate techniques of assessing these varied symptoms may involve recognition of computer‐generated photographic images that simulate the patterns seen (Aslam et al. 2004).…”

Section: What Is Glare?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Principles of disability glare measurement: an ophthalmological perspective

Aslam¹,

Haider²,

Murray³

2007

Acta Ophthalmologica Scandinavica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. Disability glare describes the loss of retinal image contrast as a result of intraocular light scatter, or straylight. It has increasingly important modern implications such as with cataract and refractive surgery or high-intensity lighting. However, its measurement has proven difficult despite many varying approaches. This article aims to explain the principles and problems associated with glare testing that are important for assessment and use of glare measures. After defining disability glare, this article discusses the importance of its measurement to current clinical practice. It explains the principles and mechanisms that underlie disability glare and its measurement. Finally, some examples of available glare tests are described to illustrate the principles discussed.

show abstract

“… 1 2 However, the literature comparing IOLs is equivocal as to which design features minimise dysphotopsia, due principally to the lack of objective methods for assessing dysphotopsia. The majority of studies examining dysphotopsia use various subjective questioning in the form of verbal interviews, 3 4 bespoke questionnaires, 5 a validated questionnaire 6 7 or through subject-initiated complaints. 8 An alternative method is to use graphics depicting visual demonstrations of different types of dysphotopsia allowing the subject to indicate which is most representative of what they perceive.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment of dysphotopsia in pseudophakic subjects with multifocal intraocular lenses

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

AimTo better understand the phenomenon of dysphotopsia in patients implanted with multifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs).MethodsForty-five patients (aged 61.8±8.9 years) implanted bilaterally with Tecnis ZM900 (diffractive multifocal), Lentis Mplus MF30 (segmented refractive multifocal) or Softec-1 (monofocal) IOLs (each n=15) 4–6 months previously and who had achieved a good surgical outcome were examined. Each reported their dysphotopsia symptoms subjectively, identified its form (EyeVisPod illustrations), quantified retinal straylight (C-Quant) and halo perception (Aston halometer). Retinal straylight and halometry was repeated by a second masked clinician to determine interobserver repeatability.ResultsSubjective dysphotopsia ratings were able to differentiate Tecnis ZM900 from Lentis Mplus MF30 (p<0.001), but not Lentis Mplus MF30 from groups implanted with Softec-1 (p=0.290). Straylight was similar between the monofocal and multifocal IOL designs (p=0.664). ZM900 IOLs demonstrated a uniform increase in dysphotopsia in comparison with the monofocal IOL (p<0.001) as measured with the halometer, whereas sectorial refractive multifocal IOLs demonstrated a localised increase in dysphotopsia over the inferior visual field. Intraobserver repeatability was good for the straylight (intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC)=0.77) and halometry (ICC=0.89). There was no significant correlation between the subjective dysphotopsia severity and the straylight (p=0.503) or halometry (p>0.10) quantification or between straylight and the halo area (p>0.30).ConclusionsMultifocal IOLs induce symptoms of dysphotopsia. Straylight did not differentiate between IOL designs, however halometry identified clear differences in light scatter due to the IOL optics. Whereas, subjective rating of overall dysphotopsia are not strongly associated with straylight or halo perception, the halometry polar diagram reflected the subjective descriptions of dysphotopsia.

show abstract

Development of a Forced Choice Photographic Questionnaire for Photic Phenomena and Its Testing – Repeatability, Reliability and Validity

Cited by 13 publications

References 13 publications

Presbyopia: Effectiveness of correction strategies

Presbyopia: Effectiveness of correction strategies

Principles of disability glare measurement: an ophthalmological perspective

Assessment of dysphotopsia in pseudophakic subjects with multifocal intraocular lenses

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About