Literature DB >> 11006221

Monocular versus binocular visual acuity as measures of vision impairment and predictors of visual disability.

G S Rubin1, B Muñoz, K Bandeen-Roche, S K West.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To examine the relationship between monocular and binocular visual acuities as predictors of visual disability in a population-based sample of individuals 65 years of age and older.
METHODS: Two thousand five hundred twenty community-dwelling residents of Salisbury, Maryland, between the ages of 65 and 84 years of age were recruited for the study. Corrected visual acuity was measured monocularly and binocularly using ETDRS charts. Reading speed, face discrimination, and self-reported difficulty with visual tasks were also determined.
RESULTS: Binocular acuity is predicted with reasonable accuracy by acuity in the better eye alone, but not by the widely used American Medical Association (AMA) weighted-average algorithm. The AMA algorithm significantly underestimates binocular acuity when the interocular acuity difference exceeds one line. Monocular acuity and binocular acuity were significantly better predictors of reading speed than the AMA weighted score or a recently proposed Functional Vision Score (FVS). Monocular acuity in the better eye, binocular acuity, and the AMA and FVS algorithms were equally good predictors of self-reported vision disability. None of the acuity measures were good predictors of face recognition ability.
CONCLUSIONS: The binocular acuities of older individuals can be inferred from measures of monocular acuity. There is little evidence for binocular inhibition when the monocular acuities in the two eyes are unequal, as opposed to the widely used AMA algorithm for computing binocular visual impairment. For tasks that are strongly associated with visual acuity, such as reading, this association can be captured from measures of monocular acuity and does not require separate assessment of binocular acuity.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 11006221

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci        ISSN: 0146-0404            Impact factor:   4.799


  37 in total

1.  Reliability of a standardized reading chart system: variance component analysis, test-retest and inter-chart reliability.

Authors:  Eva Stifter; Franz König; Thomas Lang; Peter Bauer; Sibylla Richter-Müksch; Michaela Velikay-Parel; Wolfgang Radner
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2003-12-10       Impact factor: 3.117

2.  A utility analysis correlation with visual acuity: methodologies and vision in the better and poorer eyes.

Authors:  M M Brown; G C Brown; S Sharma; A F Smith; J Landy
Journal:  Int Ophthalmol       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 2.031

3.  A new look at the WHOQOL as health-related quality of life instrument among visually impaired people using Rasch analysis.

Authors:  Vijaya K Gothwal; Marmamula Srinivas; Gullapalli N Rao
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2012-05-22       Impact factor: 4.147

4.  Monocular and binocular low-contrast visual acuity and optical coherence tomography in pediatric multiple sclerosis.

Authors:  Amy T Waldman; Girish Hiremath; Robert A Avery; Amy Conger; Stacy L Pineles; Michael J Loguidice; Lauren S Talman; Kristin M Galetta; Michael J Shumski; James Wilson; E'tona Ford; Amy M Lavery; Darrel Conger; Benjamin M Greenberg; Jonas H Ellenberg; Elliot M Frohman; Laura J Balcer; Peter A Calabresi
Journal:  Mult Scler Relat Disord       Date:  2013-05-01       Impact factor: 4.339

5.  Quality of life and relative importance: a comparison of time trade-off and conjoint analysis methods in patients with age-related macular degeneration.

Authors:  P A Aspinall; A R Hill; B Dhillon; A M Armbrecht; P Nelson; C Lumsden; E Farini-Hudson; R Brice; A Vickers; P Buchholz
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  2007-01-17       Impact factor: 4.638

6.  Visual acuity's association with levels of leisure-time physical activity in community-dwelling older adults.

Authors:  Mark W Swanson; Eric Bodner; Patricia Sawyer; Richard M Allman
Journal:  J Aging Phys Act       Date:  2011-08-16       Impact factor: 1.961

7.  Monocular vs. binocular measurement of spatial vision in elders.

Authors:  Marilyn E Schneck; Gunilla Haegerstöm-Portnoy; Lori A Lott; John A Brabyn
Journal:  Optom Vis Sci       Date:  2010-08       Impact factor: 1.973

8.  One eye or two: a comparison of binocular and monocular low-contrast acuity testing in multiple sclerosis.

Authors:  Stacy L Pineles; Eileen E Birch; Lauren S Talman; David J Sackel; Elliot M Frohman; Peter A Calabresi; Steven L Galetta; Maureen G Maguire; Laura J Balcer
Journal:  Am J Ophthalmol       Date:  2011-05-12       Impact factor: 5.258

9.  A frequency-tagging electrophysiological method to identify central and peripheral visual field deficits.

Authors:  Noémie Hébert-Lalonde; Lionel Carmant; Dima Safi; Marie-Sylvie Roy; Maryse Lassonde; Dave Saint-Amour
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  2014-05-10       Impact factor: 2.379

10.  Assessment of functional vision score and vision-specific quality of life in individuals with retinitis pigmentosa.

Authors:  Je Hyun Seo; Hyeong Gon Yu; Byung Joo Lee
Journal:  Korean J Ophthalmol       Date:  2009-09-08
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.