Article

Normative pediatric visual acuity using single surrounded HOTV optotypes on the Electronic Visual Acuity Tester following the Amblyopia Treatment Study protocol.

Retina Foundation of Southwest, Dallas, Texas 75231, USA.
Journal of AAPOS: the official publication of the American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus / American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus (Impact Factor: 1.14). 05/2008; 12(2):145-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.jaapos.2007.08.014
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT To provide normative pediatric visual acuity data using HOTV optotypes presented on the Electronic Visual Acuity Tester following the Amblyopia Treatment Study (ATS) protocol.
Monocular testing was conducted on 384 healthy full-term children ranging from 3 to 10 years of age (mean, 5.4 years; SD, 1.8 years). A total of 373 children completed monocular testing of each eye. In addition, 23 adults (mean, 28.7 years; SD, 4.9 years) were tested for comparison. Both monocular visual acuity and interocular acuity differences were recorded.
Mean visual acuity improved by slightly more than one line (0.12 logMAR) from 3 years of age to adulthood, increasing from 0.08 logMAR to -0.04 logMAR (F(6,400) = 26.3, p < 2.0 x 10(-26)). At all ages, mean interocular acuity difference was less than one line on a standard acuity chart (overall mean difference = 0.04 logMAR; SD, 0.06 logMAR).
These results represent the first normative data reported for HOTV optotypes using the ATS protocol on the Electronic Visual Acuity Tester. These data may play an important role in clinical practice, screening, and clinical research.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Christina S Cheng, Sep 04, 2014
0 Followers
 · 
103 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Aim: To highlight some areas where there is potential for confusion regarding terminology within orthop-tics and to discuss the evidence surrounding these topics. Methods: A literature-based review was performed. Relevant material was identified using Google, PubMed, and an orthoptic journals/conference transactions search facility. A forward citation search was also performed using Web of Knowledge. Results: Ambiguous terms have been highlighted in the areas of strabismus surgery, microtropia, abnormal retinal correspondence and critical periods for visual development. In strabismus surgery, the terms 'functional' and 'cosmetic' have double meaning and can even be inaccurate. Microtropia has undergone numerous name changes over the years – some geographical, and others due to its multiple clinical presentations. In addition, abnormal retinal correspondence is a term that has become ambiguous due to the advent of macular translocation procedures which physically move the retinal points. Lastly, 'critical period' is frequently used in the singular and applied to amblyopia treatment. However, evidence has demonstrated there are three critical periods applied and that the timing of these varies according to which aspect of visual function is being evaluated. Conclusion: Regardless of how ambiguities in orthop-tic terminology arise, many issues can be resolved by simply updating the terms used. However, when conducting a review of the literature, the evolution of orthoptic terminology must be accounted for, to ensure accurate evaluation.
    British & Irish Orthoptic Journal 01/2010; 7:8-13.
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To determine the sensitivity and specificity of the Web-based vision-screening test (WBT) VisionForKids.org when administered by an untrained layperson in a controlled environment. Visual acuities were obtained by an untrained layperson using the WBT under observation and by an ophthalmic professional using the Electronic Visual Acuity (EVA) Tester. Subjects were randomized to which method was used first. Subjects were considered to have failed by the following criteria: in children <48 months, 20/50 vision; in children between 48 and 59 months, 20/40 or worse; in children ≥60 months, 20/30 or worse. The results of the vision examinations by the WBT and the EVA Tester were compared; sensitivity and specificity of the WBT and the correlation coefficient to detect normal and abnormal vision compared to EVA testing were determined. Visual acuities were obtained on 203 children between ages 3 and 12 years (average age, 7.4 years). Sensitivity of the WBT was 78.7% (95% CI, 66.0%-87.7%), specificity was 89.4% (95% CI, 82.9%-93.8%). The correlation coefficient of EVA testing with the WBT was 0.89 (P < 0.001). This layperson-administered WBT, VisionForKids.org, is valid for identifying amblyopia in a controlled environment, making it possible for cost-effective and easily accessible vision screening to be performed by laypersons. Copyright © 2015 American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
    Journal of American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus 02/2015; 19(1):29-32. DOI:10.1016/j.jaapos.2014.10.021 · 1.14 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare the accommodative performance of the amblyopic eye of children with unilateral amblyopia to that of their non-amblyopic eye, and also to that of children without amblyopia, during both monocular and binocular viewing. Methods: Modified Nott retinoscopy was used to measure accommodative performance of 38 subjects with unilateral amblyopia and 25 subjects with typical vision from 3 to 13 years of age during monocular and binocular viewing at target distances of 50, 33, and 25 cm. The relationship between accommodative demand and inter-ocular difference (IOD) in accommodative error was assessed in each group. Results: The mean IOD in monocular accommodative error for amblyopic subjects across all three viewing distances was 0.49D (95% CI = ±1.12D) in the 180° meridian and 0.54D (95% CI= ±1.27D) in the 90° meridian, with the amblyopic eye exhibiting greater accommodative errors on average. IOD in monocular accommodative error increased significantly with increasing accommodative demand; 5%, 47%, and 58% of amblyopic subjects had monocular errors in the amblyopic eye that fell outside the upper 95% confidence limit for the better eye of control subjects at viewing distances of 50, 33, and 25cm, respectively. Conclusions: When viewing monocularly, children with unilateral amblyopia had greater mean accommodative errors in their amblyopic eyes than in their non-amblyopic eyes, and when compared with control subjects. This could lead to unintended retinal image defocus during patching therapy for amblyopia. Copyright © 2015 by Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology.
    Investigative Ophthalmology &amp Visual Science 01/2015; 56(2). DOI:10.1167/iovs.14-14948 · 3.66 Impact Factor

Similar Publications