| Literature DB >> 27257034 |
Vanessa Fimreite1, Kevin T Willeford2, Kenneth J Ciuffreda2.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Spectral filters have been used clinically in patients with mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI). However, they have not been formally assessed using objective techniques in this population. Thus, the aim of the present pilot study was to determine the effect of spectral filters on reading performance and visuo-cortical responsivity in adults with mTBI.Entities:
Keywords: Eye movements; Filtros espectrales; Lectura; Lesión cerebral traumática leve; Mild traumatic brain injury; Movimientos oculares; Potencial visualmente evocado (VEP); Reading; Spectral filters; Visagraph; Visual-evoked potential (VEP)
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27257034 PMCID: PMC5030322 DOI: 10.1016/j.optom.2016.04.004
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Optom ISSN: 1989-1342
Figure 1Cross-sectional view of the Intuitive Colorimeter. A beam of white light from a tungsten halogen lamp (L) is reflected from a mirror (M) and passes through a wheel (W) and into a box with matte white inner surfaces (S). The wheel is divided into three sectors, each covered with a different filter so as to transmit light of a different color (red, green, or blue). The colored light is mixed as it is reflected and scattered from the inner surfaces of the box. Calibrated text (T) is mounted on one surface of this box and viewed through a window in the front. Viewing distance is approximately 40 cm (2.5D). Saturation increases with eccentricity of the white beam, whereas hue changes with rotation.
Figure 2Band-pass spectral lenses within the viewing spectacles and holder.
Summary of primary test findings.
| Parameter | Lens condition | Mean parameter value | Mean parameter value |
|---|---|---|---|
| VN | TBI | ||
| Reading rate | NL | 247.60 | 192.66 |
| ND | 263.55 | 178.16 | |
| B | 282.70 | 187.08 | |
| PT | 257.20 | 171.81 | |
| R | 282.90 | 171.83 | |
| Number of fixations | NL | 71.25 | 119.50 |
| ND | 72.90 | 121.41 | |
| B | 60.41 | 119.00 | |
| PT | 69.66 | 126.00 | |
| R | 67.33 | 133.91 | |
| Number of regressions | NL | 10.33 | 18.66 |
| ND | 8.55 | 21.25 | |
| B | 7.08 | 19.41 | |
| PT | 8.16 | 19.09 | |
| R | 7.50 | 17.91 | |
| Fixation duration | NL | 355.50 | 300.00 |
| ND | 396.36 | 305.83 | |
| B | 367.50 | 305.83 | |
| PT | 362.50 | 316.36 | |
| R | 383.33 | 303.33 | |
| VEP AMP | NL | 13.63 | 15.27 |
| ND | 13.09 | 16.08 | |
| B | 13.36 | 14.33 | |
| R | 13.66 | 13.91 | |
| PT | 13.72 | 14.86 | |
| VEP latency | NL | 109.12 | 107.67 |
| ND | 111.63 | 113.39 | |
| B | 112.14 | 112.32 | |
| R | 111.94 | 111.25 | |
| PT | 110.88 | 112.41 | |
Spectral filtered used that resulted in the best and worst results in each VN and mTBI subject for the two parameters (i.e. RR = reading rate and VEP Amp = VEP amplitude).
| Subject | Best | Worst | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| R.R. | VEP AMP | R.R. | VEP AMP | |
| N1 | NL | R | ND | NL |
| N2 | B | NL | NL | R |
| N3 | B | NL | ND | ND |
| N4 | B | NL | NL | B |
| N5 | ND | PT | B | NL |
| N6 | ND | PT | NL | ND |
| N7 | NL | NL | ND | PT |
| N8 | ND | R | NL | ND |
| N9 | B | B | NL | PT |
| N10 | NL | PT | R | ND |
| N11 | B | B | PT | PT |
| N12 | B | R | ND | NL |
| TBI1 | ND | NL | PT | PT |
| TBI2 | R | R | ND | NL |
| TBI3 | ND | ND | R | R |
| TBI4 | NL | ND | ND | PT |
| TBI5 | NL | ND | ND | B |
| TNI6 | B | B | NL | PT |
| TBI7 | PT | ND | R | B |
| TBI8 | PT | ND | R | R |
| TBI9 | NL | ND | ND | PT |
| TBI10 | NL | ND | ||
| TBI11 | ND | R | ||
| TBI12 | B | NL | R | B |
These two subjects declined VEP testing.