Evaluation of a New Controlled Point Source LED Glare Tester for Disability Glare Detection in Participants With and Without Cataracts

Epitropoulos, Alice; Fram, Nicole R.; Masket, Samuel; Price, Francis W.; Snyder, Michael E.; Stulting, R. Doyle

doi:10.3928/1081597x-20150225-03

Cited by 7 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Disability glare is usually quantified as the reduction in vision from a glare source present within the visual field, and is due to the spread of light (or straylight) across the retina (Vos, 2003). A psychophysical method to assess straylight has also been commercialised, but its ability to differentiate between multifocal IOLs is limited as dysphotopsia due to multifocal IOLs may primarily be the result of a second out of focus image being present on the retina (typically corresponding to angles smaller than one degree) rather than diffuse straylight over the retinal surface (scatter affecting an area much broader than one degree) as induced by conditions such as cataract (Epitropoulos et al, 2015;Hofmann et al, 2009). To measure the qualitatively described light surrounding retinal blur circle or halo, halometers have been created and validated, which measure the size of the photopic scotoma created by a central glare source (Babizhayev et al, 2009;Buckhurst et al, 2015;Meikies et al, 2013).…”

Section: 2mentioning

confidence: 99%

Presbyopia: Effectiveness of correction strategies

Wolffsohn

Davies

2019

Progress in Retinal and Eye Research

189

158

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

189

158

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…179 Newer devices may provide more accurate assessments. 180 Other tests, such as the potential acuity pinhole, require the patient to read a brightly illuminated near card through a trial frame at near. 174,181,182 The near-card pinhole methods are simpler and less expensive than the technology-dependent potential acuity meter and scanning laser ophthalmoscope.…”

Section: P12mentioning

confidence: 99%

Cataract in the Adult Eye Preferred Practice Pattern®

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“… 24 Dysphotopsia due to multifocal IOLs may primarily be the result of a second out of focus image being present on the retina rather than diffuse straylight over the retinal surface (scatter affecting a much broader area) as induced by conditions such as cataract. 13 17 To measure the qualitatively described light surrounding retinal blur circle or halo, several instruments often referred to as ‘halometers’ have been created. 25–27 These devices measure the size of a photopic scotoma created by a central glare source.…”

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

Evaluation of a New Controlled Point Source LED Glare Tester for Disability Glare Detection in Participants With and Without Cataracts

Abstract: A new controlled point source LED glare tester demonstrated the adverse effect on visual acuity due to glare in patients with cataract, accurately simulated night driving glare issues for patients with cataracts, and was rated as easy to use and useful by investigators.

Cited by 7 publications

References 16 publications

Presbyopia: Effectiveness of correction strategies

Presbyopia: Effectiveness of correction strategies

Cataract in the Adult Eye Preferred Practice Pattern®

Assessment of dysphotopsia in pseudophakic subjects with multifocal intraocular lenses

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About