VEP-based acuity assessment in low vision

被引:20
作者
Hoffmann, Michael B. [1 ,2 ]
Brands, Jan [1 ]
Behrens-Baumann, Wolfgang [1 ]
Bach, Michael [3 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Otto von Guericke Univ, Dept Ophthalmol, Magdeburg, Germany
[2] Ctr Behav Brain Sci, Magdeburg, Germany
[3] Univ Freiburg, Ctr Eye, Med Ctr, Freiburg, Germany
[4] Univ Freiburg, Fac Med, Freiburg, Germany
关键词
Visual acuity; Objective assessment; Visual evoked potentials; Low vision; Sweep VEP; Step VEP; VISUAL-ACUITY; OPTICAL DEFOCUS; POTENTIALS; LIMITS; TIME;
D O I
10.1007/s10633-017-9613-y
中图分类号
R77 [眼科学];
学科分类号
100212 ;
摘要
Objective assessment of visual acuity (VA) is possible with VEP methodology, but established with sufficient precision only for vision better than about 1.0 logMAR. We here explore whether this can be extended down to 2.0 logMAR, highly desirable for low-vision evaluations. Based on the stepwise sweep algorithm (Bach et al. in Br J Ophthalmol 92:396-403, 2008) VEPs to monocular steady-state brief onset pattern stimulation (7.5-Hz checkerboards, 40% contrast, 40 ms on, 93 ms off) were recorded for eight different check sizes, from 0.5A degrees to 9.0A degrees, for two runs with three occipital electrodes in a Laplace-approximating montage. We examined 22 visually normal participants where acuity was reduced to ae 2.0 logMAR with frosted transparencies. With the established heuristic algorithm the "VEP acuity" was extracted and compared to psychophysical VA, both obtained at 57 cm distance. In 20 of the 22 participants with artificially reduced acuity the automatic analysis indicated a valid result (1.80 logMAR on average) in at least one of the two runs. 95% test-retest limits of agreement on average were +/- 0.09 logMAR for psychophysical, and +/- 0.21 logMAR for VEP-derived acuity. For 15 participants we obtained results in both runs and averaged them. In 12 of these 15 the low-acuity results stayed within the 95% confidence interval (+/- 0.3 logMAR) as established by Bach et al. (2008). The fully automated analysis yielded good agreement of psychophysical and electrophysiological VAs in 12 of 15 cases (80%) in the low-vision range down to 2.0 logMAR. This encourages us to further pursue this methodology and assess its value in patients.
引用
收藏
页码:209 / 218
页数:10
相关论文
共 29 条
[1]  
American Foundation for Blind, 2008, KEY DEF STAT TERMS
[2]  
[Anonymous], 2000, JAMA, V284, P3043
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2016, ICD-10 Version.
[4]   Comparison of Snellen acuity and objective assessment using the spatial frequency sweep PVER [J].
Arai, M ;
Katsumi, O ;
Paranhos, FRL ;
DeFaria, JML ;
Hirose, T .
GRAEFES ARCHIVE FOR CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL OPHTHALMOLOGY, 1997, 235 (07) :442-447
[5]   Raster-scan cathode-ray tubes for vision research - Limits of resolution in space, time and intensity, and some solutions [J].
Bach, M ;
Meigen, T ;
Strasburger, H .
SPATIAL VISION, 1997, 10 (04) :403-414
[6]   Visual evoked potential-based acuity assessment in normal vision, artificially degraded vision, and in patients [J].
Bach, M. ;
Maurer, J. P. ;
Wolf, M. E. .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF OPHTHALMOLOGY, 2008, 92 (03) :396-403
[7]   The Freiburg Visual Acuity test - Automatic measurement of visual acuity [J].
Bach, M .
OPTOMETRY AND VISION SCIENCE, 1996, 73 (01) :49-53
[8]   Do's and don'ts in Fourier analysis of steady-state potentials [J].
Bach, M ;
Meigen, T .
DOCUMENTA OPHTHALMOLOGICA, 1999, 99 (01) :69-82
[9]  
BACH M, 1989, SEEING CONTOUR COLOU, P478
[10]  
Bach M, 2007, Freiburg evoked potentials