Factors Affecting Contrast Sensitivity in Healthy Individuals: A Pilot Study

Karatepe, Arzu Seyhan; Köse, Süheyla; Eğrilmez, Sait

doi:10.4274/tjo.93763

Cited by 24 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Loss of sensitivity at high frequencies is known to occur in older adults due to age-related changes such as loss of lens transparency and degeneration of rod photoreceptors in the retina. 11 , 12 , 13 While the mean contrast sensitivity of our patients was found to be below normal limits, especially at frequencies of 6 and 18 cpd, it returned to within normal range postoperatively. Contrast sensitivity has been shown to be associated with visual functions such as vision, reading, and driving in low-light conditions and has been identified as a significant indicator of functional vision.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 48%

Effects of Upper Eyelid Blepharoplasty on Contrast Sensitivity in Dermatochalasis Patients

Nalcı¹,

Hoşal²,

Gündüz³

2020

tjo

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: To evaluate the impact of upper eyelid blepharoplasty on contrast sensitivity in dermatochalasis patients. Materials and Methods: Best corrected visual acuity, ophthalmologic examination, eyelid examination, lash ptosis, contrast sensitivity using sine-wave contrast sensitivity chart, keratometric parameters, and corneal aberrations of 34 eyes of 34 patients who underwent upper eyelid blepharoplasty due to dermatochalasis in our clinic between the years 2014 and 2018 were evaluated preoperatively and at postoperative 3 months. Results: Twenty-three (68%) of the patients were females and 11 (32%) were males. Mean age was 63.1±7 (52-81) years. Mean best corrected visual acuity was 0.036±0.06 (0-0.15) logMAR preoperatively and postoperatively (p>0.05). Contrast sensitivity values of the patients at the frequencies of 1.5, 3, 6, 12, and 18 cycles per degree were 44.38±19.5, 59.03±27.2, 41.44±34.1, 15.15±19.3, and 5.15±4.26 preoperatively and 44.80±20.9, 76.85±33.4, 63.21±46.4, 28.21±31.1, and 10.5±9.5 postoperatively, respectively. The difference between contrast sensitivity values was statistically significant at the frequencies of 3, 6, 12, and 18 cpd (p=0.005, =0.001, <0.001, and <0.001, respectively). Although lash ptosis of the patients improved significantly after the surgery, there was no correlation between lash ptosis improvement and change in contrast sensitivity (p>0.05). Keratometric values and corneal high order aberrations did not change significantly after the surgery (p>0.05). Conclusion: Contrast sensitivity significantly increases after upper eyelid blepharoplasty, especially at higher spatial frequencies which are known to deteriorate due to age-related changes in the lens and retina in older adults. Our results show that blepharoplasty may have additional functional indications for elderly dermatochalasis patients in terms of improving the functions such as performing daily tasks and reading.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 48%

Effects of Upper Eyelid Blepharoplasty on Contrast Sensitivity in Dermatochalasis Patients

Nalcı¹,

Hoşal²,

Gündüz³

2020

tjo

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Furthermore, combining the results of both age groups, (i.e., a general view of the development sequence) showed a link between contrast sensitivity and foveal thickness. Hence, since photoreceptor packing is considered to affect visual acuity [ 14 – 16 ], it is reasonable to suggest that age (i.e., epiphenomena) is not the only factor contributing to development of contrast sensitivity. Thus, these results support the idea that the maturation of contrast sensitivity is affected by foveal development (in addition to maturation of the visual cortex).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Foveola width and cone diameter reach the adult level at around 45 months of age, but outer segment length and cone packing density continue to develop afterwards [ 8 , 13 ]. This process reflects the maturation of the retina and accordingly affects visual acuity and contrast sensitivity [ 14 – 16 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Development of global visual processing: From the retina to the perceptive field

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Young children exhibit poorer visual performance than adults due to immaturity of the fovea and of the fundamental processing of visual functions such as masking and crowding. Recent studies suggest that masking and crowding are closely related to the size of the fundamental processing unit—the perceptive field (PF). However, while it is known that the retina and basic visual functions develop throughout childhood, it is not clear whether and how changes in the size of the PF affect masking and crowding. Furthermore, no retinal and perceptual development data have been collected from the same cohort and time. Here we explored the developmental process of the PF and the basic visual functions. Psychophysical and imaging methods were used to test visual functions and foveal changes in participants ranging from 3–17 years old. Lateral masking, crowding and contrast sensitivity were tested using computerized tasks. Foveal measurements were obtained from spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (OCT). The children patterns below 6 years exhibited high crowding, while the expected facilitation was found only at a larger target-flanker distance than required for children above 6 years, who exhibited the typical adult. Foveal thickness and macular volume for the children below 6 years were significantly lower than for the older group. Significant correlation was found for contrast sensitivity, foveal thickness and macular volume with age and between contrast sensitivity and foveal thickness. Our data suggest that the developmental processes at the retina and visual cortex occur in the same age range. Thus, in parallel to maturation of the PF, which enables reduction in crowding, foveal development contributes to increasing contrast sensitivity.

show abstract

“…Due to the difference in design, ReSTOR +3.0 D combines a 0.86 mm diameter central diffractive zone and 9 diffractive steps in 10.2 mm 2 area for enhanced near vision close to 40 cm, surrounded by a refractive region for distance vision, while ReSTOR +2.5 D has 7 diffractive steps in smaller area (8.4 mm 2 ) with a 0.94 mm diameter central refractive zone dedicated 100% to distance. Under normal circumstances, binocular measurements are better than monocular [26]. Thus, the mutual compensation of asymmetric light distribution through the mix and match approach might allow the binocular contrast sensitivity to be superior to the bilateral group with symmetrical light distribution.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Long-Term Clinical Outcomes after Mix and Match Implantation of Two Multifocal Intraocular Lenses with Different Adds

Jiang

Tian

et al. 2019

Journal of Ophthalmology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose To compare long-term clinical outcomes between patients with bilateral implantation of +3.0 diopter (D) multifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) and mix and match implantation of +2.5 D and +3.0 D multifocal IOLs. Material and Methods This retrospective observer-masked cohort study comprised 66 eyes of 33 patients with two different strategies of binocular multifocal IOLs implantation: bilateral +3.0 D (17 patients) (bilateral group) and mix and match +2.5 D and +3.0 D (16 patients) (blended group). Patients were recruited 1 year (±3 months) after second-eye surgery. The primary effectiveness endpoint was binocular uncorrected intermediate visual acuity (UCIVA) at 70 cm. The secondary assessments included binocular visual quality tests and quality-of-vision questionnaire. Results The blended group showed clinically better UCIVA (0.10 ± 0.07 logMAR) at 70 cm than the bilateral group (0.26 ± 0.09 logMAR) with a difference of 0.16 ± 0.08 logMAR (P < 0.001). Similar binocular visual acuities were achieved between the two groups at the near and far distance. The binocular defocus curves showed better performance in the blended group from 50 cm to 1 m. The mean binocular contrast sensitivities under the photopic conditions with or without glare and mesopic condition without glare were clinically better in the blended group. Both the groups reported low rate of visual phenomena, high rate of spectacle independence, and satisfaction. Conclusions Comparing with bilateral implantation of +3.0 D multifocal IOLs during the cataract surgery, mix and match implantation of +2.5 D and +3.0 D multifocal IOLs provides a wider depth of binocular focus, especially for intermediate distances, and better binocular visual quality.

show abstract

Factors Affecting Contrast Sensitivity in Healthy Individuals: A Pilot Study

Cited by 24 publications

References 15 publications

Effects of Upper Eyelid Blepharoplasty on Contrast Sensitivity in Dermatochalasis Patients

Effects of Upper Eyelid Blepharoplasty on Contrast Sensitivity in Dermatochalasis Patients

Development of global visual processing: From the retina to the perceptive field

Long-Term Clinical Outcomes after Mix and Match Implantation of Two Multifocal Intraocular Lenses with Different Adds

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About