Literature DB >> 28106888

SPARCS and Pelli-Robson contrast sensitivity testing in normal controls and patients with cataract.

L Gupta1, V Cvintal2, R Delvadia3, Y Sun4, E Erdem5, C Zangalli6, L Lu7, S S Wizov8, J Richman8, E Spaeth9, G L Spaeth8.   

Abstract

PurposeTo determine the ability of the newly developed internet-based Spaeth/Richman Contrast Sensitivity (SPARCS) test to assess contrast sensitivity centrally and peripherally in cataract subjects and controls, in comparison with the Pelli-Robson (PR) test.MethodsIn this prospective cross-sectional study, cataract subjects and age-matched normal controls were evaluated using the SPARCS and PR tests. Contrast sensitivity testing was performed in each eye twice in a standardized testing environment in randomized order. SPARCS scores were obtained for central, right upper (RUQ), right lower (RLQ), left upper (LUQ), and left lower quadrants (LLQ). PR scores were obtained for central contrast sensitivity. PR and SPARCS scores in cataract subjects were compared with controls. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) and Bland Altman analysis were used to determine test-retest reliability and correlation.ResultsA total of 162 eyes from 84 subjects were analyzed: 43 eyes from 23 cataract subjects, and 119 eyes from 61 controls. The mean scores for SPARCS centrally were 13.4 and 14.5 in the cataract and control groups, respectively (P=0.001). PR mean scores were 1.31 and 1.45 in cataract and control groups, respectively (P<0.001). ICC values for test-retest reliability for cataract subjects were 0.75 for PR and 0.61 for the SPARCS total. There was acceptable agreement between the ability of PR and SPARCS to detect the effect of cataract on central contrast sensitivity.ConclusionsBoth SPARCS and PR demonstrate a significant influence of cataract on contrast sensitivity. SPARCS offers the advantage of determining contrast sensitivity peripherally and centrally, without being influenced by literacy.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28106888      PMCID: PMC5437330          DOI: 10.1038/eye.2016.319

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eye (Lond)        ISSN: 0950-222X            Impact factor:   3.775


  21 in total

Review 1.  Contrast sensitivity and functional vision.

Authors:  Arthur P Ginsburg
Journal:  Int Ophthalmol Clin       Date:  2003

2.  Visual acuity versus letter contrast sensitivity in early cataract.

Authors:  D B Elliott; P Situ
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  1998-06       Impact factor: 1.886

3.  The Spaeth/Richman contrast sensitivity test (SPARCS): design, reproducibility and ability to identify patients with glaucoma.

Authors:  Jesse Richman; Camila Zangalli; Lan Lu; Sheryl S Wizov; Eric Spaeth; George L Spaeth
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  2014-07-22       Impact factor: 4.638

4.  Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement.

Authors:  J M Bland; D G Altman
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1986-02-08       Impact factor: 79.321

5.  Comparison of acuity, contrast sensitivity, and disability glare before and after cataract surgery.

Authors:  G S Rubin; I A Adamsons; W J Stark
Journal:  Arch Ophthalmol       Date:  1993-01

6.  How does visual impairment affect performance on tasks of everyday life? The SEE Project. Salisbury Eye Evaluation.

Authors:  Sheila K West; Gary S Rubin; Aimee T Broman; Beatriz Muñoz; Karen Bandeen-Roche; Kathleen Turano
Journal:  Arch Ophthalmol       Date:  2002-06

7.  EVALUATING CONTRAST SENSITIVITY IN AGE-RELATED MACULAR DEGENERATION USING A NOVEL COMPUTER-BASED TEST, THE SPAETH/RICHMAN CONTRAST SENSITIVITY TEST.

Authors:  Bruno M Faria; Fulya Duman; Cindy X Zheng; Michael Waisbourd; Lalita Gupta; Mohsin Ali; Camila Zangalli; Lan Lu; Sheryl S Wizov; Eric Spaeth; Jesse Richman; George L Spaeth
Journal:  Retina       Date:  2015-07       Impact factor: 4.256

8.  Correlation between contrast sensitivity and the lens opacities classification system III in age-related nuclear and cortical cataracts.

Authors:  Yong Cheng; Xuan Shi; Xiao-guang Cao; Xiao-xin Li; Yong-zhen Bao
Journal:  Chin Med J (Engl)       Date:  2013       Impact factor: 2.628

9.  Loss of contrast sensitivity in diabetic patients with LOCS II classified cataracts.

Authors:  L T Chylack; N Padhye; P M Khu; C Wehner; J Wolfe; D McCarthy; B Rosner; J Friend
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  1993-01       Impact factor: 4.638

10.  Age and visual impairment decrease driving performance as measured on a closed-road circuit.

Authors:  Joanne M Wood
Journal:  Hum Factors       Date:  2002       Impact factor: 2.888

View more
  8 in total

1.  Assessment of contrast sensitivity by Spaeth Richman Contrast Sensitivity Test and Pelli Robson Chart Test in patients with varying severity of glaucoma.

Authors:  Sahil Thakur; Parul Ichhpujani; Suresh Kumar; Ravneet Kaur; Sunandan Sood
Journal:  Eye (Lond)       Date:  2018-05-14       Impact factor: 3.775

2.  Association of Cadmium and Lead Exposure With the Incidence of Contrast Sensitivity Impairment Among Middle-aged Adults.

Authors:  Adam J Paulsen; Carla R Schubert; Lauren J Johnson; Yanjun Chen; Dayna S Dalton; Barbara E K Klein; Ronald Klein; Alex Pinto; Karen J Cruickshanks
Journal:  JAMA Ophthalmol       Date:  2018-12-01       Impact factor: 7.389

3.  Test-retest Repeatability of the Ohio Contrast Cards.

Authors:  Mawada Osman; Stevie M Njeru; Gregory R Hopkins; Angela M Brown
Journal:  Optom Vis Sci       Date:  2021-09-01       Impact factor: 2.106

4.  Development and Validation of a Smartphone-based Contrast Sensitivity Test.

Authors:  Esmael Habtamu; Andrew Bastawrous; Nigel M Bolster; Zerihun Tadesse; E Kelly Callahan; Bizuayehu Gashaw; David Macleod; Matthew J Burton
Journal:  Transl Vis Sci Technol       Date:  2019-09-13       Impact factor: 3.283

5.  Contrast Sensitivity Loss in Patients With Posttreatment Lyme Disease.

Authors:  Alison W Rebman; Ting Yang; John N Aucott; Erica A Mihm; Sheila K West
Journal:  Transl Vis Sci Technol       Date:  2021-03-01       Impact factor: 3.283

6.  Effects of Citicoline, Homotaurine, and Vitamin E on Contrast Sensitivity and Visual-Related Quality of Life in Patients with Primary Open-Angle Glaucoma: A Preliminary Study.

Authors:  Pier Franco Marino; Gemma Caterina Maria Rossi; Giuseppe Campagna; Decio Capobianco; Ciro Costagliola
Journal:  Molecules       Date:  2020-11-29       Impact factor: 4.411

Review 7.  Visual function tests for glaucoma practice - What is relevant?

Authors:  Aparna Rao; Debananda Padhy; Anindita Pal; Avik Kumar Roy
Journal:  Indian J Ophthalmol       Date:  2022-03       Impact factor: 2.969

8.  Visual function evaluation for low vision patients with advanced glaucoma.

Authors:  Soo Ji Jeon; Younhea Jung; Chang-Sub Jung; Hae-Young Lopilly Park; Chan Kee Park
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2020-02       Impact factor: 1.817

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.