Literature DB >> 27898980

Feasibility of Macular Integrity Assessment (MAIA) Microperimetry in Children: Sensitivity, Reliability, and Fixation Stability in Healthy Observers.

Pete R Jones1, Narmella Yasoubi2, Marko Nardini3, Gary S Rubin1.   

Abstract

Purpose: To assess the feasibility of macular integrity assessment (MAIA) microperimetry (MP) in children. Also to establish representative outcome measures (differential light sensitivity, fixation stability, test-retest reliability) for children without visual impairment.
Methods: Thirty-three adults and 33 children (9-12 years) were asked to perform three monocular MAIA examinations within a single session (dominant eye only).
Results: Children exhibited poorer test-retest reliability than adults for measures of both mean sensitivity (95% coefficient of repeatability [CoR95] = 2.7 vs. 2.3 dB, P = 0.036) and pointwise sensitivity (CoR95 = 6.2 vs. 5.7 dB, P < 0.001). Mean sensitivity was lower in children (27.6 vs. 29.5 dB, P < 0.001), and fixation stability was poorer (95% bivariate contour ellipse area [BCEA95] = 4.58 vs. 1.14, P < 0.001). Mean sensitivity was negatively correlated with fixation stability (r = -0.44, P < 0.001). Both children and adults exhibited substantial practice effects, with mean sensitivity improving by 0.5 dB (adults) and 0.9 dB (children) between examinations 1 and 2 (P ≤ 0.017). There were no significant differences between examinations 2 and 3 (P ≥ 0.374). Conclusions: Microperimetry is feasible in 9- to 12-year-old children. However, systematically lower sensitivities mean that the classification boundary for "healthy" performance should be lowered in children, pending development of techniques to improve attentiveness/fixation that may reduce or remove this difference. High measurement variability suggests that the results of multiple tests should be averaged when possible. Learning effects are a potential confound, and it is recommended that the results of the first examination be discarded.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27898980     DOI: 10.1167/iovs.16-20037

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


  11 in total

1.  Comparison of Quality and Output of Different Optimal Perimetric Testing Approaches in Children With Glaucoma.

Authors:  Dipesh E Patel; Phillippa M Cumberland; Bronwen C Walters; Isabelle Russell-Eggitt; John Brookes; Maria Papadopoulos; Peng Tee Khaw; Ananth C Viswanathan; David Garway-Heath; Mario Cortina-Borja; Jugnoo S Rahi
Journal:  JAMA Ophthalmol       Date:  2018-02-01       Impact factor: 7.389

2.  CORRELATION OF STRUCTURAL AND FUNCTIONAL OUTCOME MEASURES IN A PHASE ONE TRIAL OF CILIARY NEUROTROPHIC FACTOR IN TYPE 2 IDIOPATHIC MACULAR TELANGIECTASIA.

Authors:  Ferenc B Sallo; Irene Leung; Traci E Clemons; Tunde Peto; Emily Y Chew; Daniel Pauleikhoff; Alan C Bird
Journal:  Retina       Date:  2018-01       Impact factor: 4.256

3.  Effect of rhegmatogenous retinal detachment on preoperative and postoperative retinal sensitivities.

Authors:  Hiroshi Noda; Shuhei Kimura; Mio Morizane Hosokawa; Yusuke Shiode; Shinichiro Doi; Kosuke Takahashi; Ryo Matoba; Yuki Kanzaki; Atsushi Fujiwara; Yuki Morizane
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2020-12-09       Impact factor: 4.379

Review 4.  Clinical Perspectives and Trends: Microperimetry as a Trial Endpoint in Retinal Disease.

Authors:  Yesa Yang; Hannah Dunbar
Journal:  Ophthalmologica       Date:  2021-02-10       Impact factor: 3.250

5.  Retinal Differential Light Sensitivity Variation Across the Macula in Healthy Subjects: Importance of Cone Separation and Loci Eccentricity.

Authors:  Danuta M Sampson; Danial Roshandel; Avenell L Chew; Yufei Wang; Paul G Stevenson; Matthew N Cooper; Elaine Ong; Lawrence Wong; Jonathan La; David Alonso-Caneiro; Enid Chelva; Jane C Khan; David D Sampson; Fred K Chen
Journal:  Transl Vis Sci Technol       Date:  2021-05-03       Impact factor: 3.283

6.  Evidence for alterations in fixational eye movements in glaucoma.

Authors:  Giovanni Montesano; David P Crabb; Pete R Jones; Paolo Fogagnolo; Maurizio Digiuni; Luca M Rossetti
Journal:  BMC Ophthalmol       Date:  2018-08-03       Impact factor: 2.209

7.  Individual Test Point Fluctuations of Macular Sensitivity in Healthy Eyes and Eyes With Age-Related Macular Degeneration Measured With Microperimetry.

Authors:  Mirella Telles Salgueiro Barboni; Zsuzsanna Szepessy; Dora Fix Ventura; János Németh
Journal:  Transl Vis Sci Technol       Date:  2018-04-23       Impact factor: 3.283

8.  Edge of Scotoma Sensitivity as a Microperimetry Clinical Trial End Point in USH2A Retinopathy.

Authors:  Jason Charng; Tina M Lamey; Jennifer A Thompson; Terri L McLaren; Mary S Attia; Ian L McAllister; Ian J Constable; David A Mackey; John N De Roach; Fred K Chen
Journal:  Transl Vis Sci Technol       Date:  2020-09-09       Impact factor: 3.283

9.  Interpreting MAIA Microperimetry Using Age- and Retinal Loci-Specific Reference Thresholds.

Authors:  Jason Charng; Paul G Sanfilippo; Mary S Attia; Monika Dolliver; Sukanya Arunachalam; Avenell L Chew; Evan N Wong; David A Mackey; Fred K Chen
Journal:  Transl Vis Sci Technol       Date:  2020-06-18       Impact factor: 3.283

10.  Multi-line Adaptive Perimetry (MAP): A New Procedure for Quantifying Visual Field Integrity for Rapid Assessment of Macular Diseases.

Authors:  Steven M Thurman; Marcello Maniglia; Pinakin G Davey; Mandy K Biles; Kristina M Visscher; Aaron R Seitz
Journal:  Transl Vis Sci Technol       Date:  2018-10-16       Impact factor: 3.283

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.