PURPOSE: The purpose of this analysis was to determine whether dynamic measures of vision, such as dynamic acuity and motion threshold, are independently associated with self-reported difficulty in activities involving vision. METHODS: Data were used from the third round of the Salisbury Eye Evaluation (n = 1198), a longitudinal, population-based study of older adults. Multiple measures of visual function were tested, including dynamic acuity, motion threshold, visual acuity, contrast sensitivity, visual fields, and stereoacuity. Difficulty was assessed using the Activities of Daily Vision Scale (ADVS). Polytomous logistic regression procedures were used to determine log odds ratios for the dynamic measures of vision while adjusting for demographic, health, and other measures of vision. RESULTS: In fully adjusted models including other vision variables, worse dynamic acuity was associated with greater difficulty on the near-vision ADVS subscale (beta = 0.68, P < 0.01), but not with the overall ADVS or the far-vision or night-driving subscales (P > 0.05). Motion threshold was not associated with the overall ADVS or any of the subscales after controlling for other vision variables, although it was associated when no other vision variables were in the models. CONCLUSIONS: Motion threshold was not independently associated with any ADVS difficulty. Dynamic acuity was independently associated with self-reported difficulty with near-vision tasks only. Other studies should confirm this association. If confirmed, strategies to improve dynamic acuity could be developed to try to reduce difficulty with tasks involving near vision.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this analysis was to determine whether dynamic measures of vision, such as dynamic acuity and motion threshold, are independently associated with self-reported difficulty in activities involving vision. METHODS: Data were used from the third round of the Salisbury Eye Evaluation (n = 1198), a longitudinal, population-based study of older adults. Multiple measures of visual function were tested, including dynamic acuity, motion threshold, visual acuity, contrast sensitivity, visual fields, and stereoacuity. Difficulty was assessed using the Activities of Daily Vision Scale (ADVS). Polytomous logistic regression procedures were used to determine log odds ratios for the dynamic measures of vision while adjusting for demographic, health, and other measures of vision. RESULTS: In fully adjusted models including other vision variables, worse dynamic acuity was associated with greater difficulty on the near-vision ADVS subscale (beta = 0.68, P < 0.01), but not with the overall ADVS or the far-vision or night-driving subscales (P > 0.05). Motion threshold was not associated with the overall ADVS or any of the subscales after controlling for other vision variables, although it was associated when no other vision variables were in the models. CONCLUSIONS: Motion threshold was not independently associated with any ADVS difficulty. Dynamic acuity was independently associated with self-reported difficulty with near-vision tasks only. Other studies should confirm this association. If confirmed, strategies to improve dynamic acuity could be developed to try to reduce difficulty with tasks involving near vision.