Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

A Comparative Analysis of the Reproducibility of the Results of Visual Acuity Assessment Using Optotype Charts

  • Published:
Biomedical Engineering Aims and scope

Visual acuity charts were compared in terms of differences between the test and retest results. Four charts were compared: ETDRS chart, Lea screener, Sivtsev chart, and a chart developed at the Institute for Information Transmission Problems (Kharkevich Institute; IITP), Russian Academy of Sciences, and based on modified 3-bar optotypes. According to the results obtained in 33 subjects, the IITP chart provided the best repeatability of measurements.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Shamshinova, A. M. and Volkov, V. V., Functional Research Methods in Ophthalmology [in Russian], Meditsina, Moscow (1999).

    Google Scholar 

  2. Koskin, S.A., Boiko, E.V., and Shelepin, Yu. E., “Modern methods for measuring the resolution of the visual system,” Opt. Zh., 75, No. 1, 22-27 (2008).

    Google Scholar 

  3. Shelepin, Yu. E., Kolesnikova, L.N., and Levkovich, Yu. I., Visocontrastometry: Measuring the Spatial Transfer Functions of the Visual System [in Russian], Nauka, Leningrad (1985).

    Google Scholar 

  4. Golovin, S. S., Clinical Ophthalmology [in Russian], Moscow (1923).

  5. Rozhkova, G. I., Belozerov, A. E., and Lebedev, D. S., “Measurement of visual acuity: Ambiguity of the influence of low-frequency components of the Fourier spectrum of optotypes,” Sensornye Sistemy, 26, No. 2, 160-171 (2012).

    Google Scholar 

  6. Rozhkova, G. I., Gracheva, M. A., and Lebedev, D. S., “Optimization of test characters and charts for the measurement of visual acuity,” in: Proceedings of the Scientific Conference of Ophthalmologists “Neva Horizons 2014” [in Russian], St. Petersburg (2014), p. 563.

  7. Rozhkova, G. I., Lebedev, D. S., Gracheva, M., and Rychkova, S., “Optimal optotype structure for monitoring visual acuity,” Proc. Latvian Acad. Sci. Section B, 71, No. 5, 327-338 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  8. “NAS-NRC. Committee on vision. Recommended standard procedures for the clinical measurement and specification of visual acuity: Report, National Research Council, National Academy of Sciences, Washington, D.C.,” Adv. Ophthalmol., 41, 103-148 (1980).

  9. Candy, T. R., Mishoulam, S. R., Nosofsky, R. M., and Dobson, V., “Adult discrimination performance for pediatric acuity test opto-types,” Invest. Ophth. Vis. Sci., 52, No. 7, 4307-4313 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Sailoganathan, A., Siderov, J., and Osuobeni, E., “A new Gujarati language logMAR visual acuity chart: Development and validation,” Indian J. Ophthalmol., 61, No. 10, 557 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Negilon, K., Mazumdar, D., Neog, A., Das, B., Medhi, J., Choudhury, M., George, R. J., and Ramani, K. K., “Construction and validation of logMAR visual acuity charts in seven Indian languages,” Indian J. Ophthalmol., 66, No. 5, 641 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Plainis, S., Tzatzala, P., Orphanos, Y., and Tsilimbaris, M. K., “A modified ETDRS visual acuity chart for European-wide use,” Optometry Vision Sci., 84, No. 7, 647-653 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Lebedev, D. S., Belozerov, A. E., and Rozhkova, G. I., Optotypes for an Accurate Assessment of Visual Acuity, RF Patent for Invention No. 2447826 (2012).

  14. Anstice, N. S., Jacobs, R. J., Simkin, S. K., Thomson, M., Thompson, B., and Collins, A. V., “Do picture-based charts over-estimate visual acuity? Comparison of Kay Pictures, Lea Symbols, HOTV and Keeler logMAR charts with Sloan letters in adults and children,” PloS One, 12, No. 2, e0170839 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Mercer, M. E., Drover, J. R., Penney, K. J., Courage, M. L., and Adams, R. J., “Comparison of Patti Pics and Lea Symbols opto-types in children and adults,” Optometry Vision Sci., 90, No. 3, 236-241 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Dobson, V., Clifford-Donaldson, C. E., Miller, J. M., Garvey, K. A., and Harvey, E. M., “A comparison of Lea Symbol vs ETDRS letter distance visual acuity in a population of young children with a high prevalence of astigmatism,” J. AAPOS, 13, No. 3, 253-257 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Shamir, R. R., Friedman, Y. G., Joskowicz, L., Mimouni, M., and Blumenthal, E. Z., “The influence of varying the number of characters per row on the accuracy and reproducibility of the ETDRS visual acuity chart,” Graefes Arch. Clin. Exp. Ophthalmol., 254, No. 5, 971-976 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Nicolas, C., Debellemanière, G., Boissier, F., Girard, C., Schwartz, C., Delbosc, B., and Saleh, M., “Reproducibility of visual acuity measurement using the ETDRS chart in daily clinical practice,” J. Français d’ophtalmologie, 39, No. 8, 700-705 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Sabour, S. and Ghassemi, F., “Accuracy and reproducibility of the ETDRS visual acuity chart: Methodological issues,” Graefes Arch. Clin. Exp. Ophthalmol., 254, No. 10, 2073 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. McGraw, P., Winn, B., and Whitaker, D., “Reliability of the Snellen chart: Better charts are now available,” BMJ, 310, 1481-1482 (1995).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Hyvärinen, L., Näsänen, R., and Laurinen, P., “New visual acuity test for pre-school children,” Acta Ophthalmol., 58, No. 4, 507-511 (1980).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Becker, R., Hübsch, S., Gräf, M. H., and Kaufmann, H., “Examination of young children with Lea symbols,” Brit. J. Ophthalmol., 86, No. 5, 513-516 (2002).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. “Vision in Preschoolers Study Group. Preschool visual acuity screening with HOTV and Lea symbols: Testability and between test agreement,” Optometry Vision Sci., 81, No. 9, 678-683 (2004).

  24. “Vision in Preschoolers (VIP) Study Group. Visual acuity results inschool-aged children and adults: Lea Symbols chart versus Bailey–Lovie chart,” Optometry Vision Sci., 80, No. 9, 650-654 (2003).

  25. Singman, E. L., Matta, N. S., Tian, J., and Silbert, D. I., “Comparing visual acuity measured by Lea Symbols and Patti Pics,” Am. Orthopt. J., 65, No. 1, 94-98 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Anstice, N. S. and Thompson, B., “The measurement of visual acuity in children: An evidence-based update,” Clin. Exp. Optom., 97, No. 1, 3-11 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Ferris, F. L. 3rd, Freidlin, V., Kassoff, A., Green, S. B., and Milton, R. C., “Relative letter and position difficulty on visual acuity charts from the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study,” Am. J. Ophthalmol., 116, No. 6, 735-740 (1993).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Rozhkova, G. I., “LogMAR for visual acuity is worse than measuring light bulb power in horsepowers,” Sensornye Sistemy, 31, No. 1, 31-43 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  29. Rozhkova, G. I., “Is there any real reason to consider ETDRS charts as the “gold standard” for measuring visual acuity?” Izv. Ross. Voen.-Med. Akad., 37, No. 2, 120-123 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  30. Kazakova, A. and Gracheva, M., “Comparison of four charts for visual acuity in view of repeatability,” in: Proc. 2nd Int. Symp. VisPEP (2018), p. 48.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Pirogov Russian National Research Medical University, Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation, Moscow, Russia

    I. B. Medvedev, D. F. Pokrovskiy & A. A. Kazakova

  2. Institute for Information Transmission Problems (Kharkevich Institute), Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russia

    M. A. Gracheva & A. A. Kazakova

Authors
  1. I. B. Medvedev
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. M. A. Gracheva
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. D. F. Pokrovskiy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. A. A. Kazakova
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to M. A. Gracheva.

Additional information

Translated from Meditsinskaya Tekhnika, Vol. 54, No. 2, Mar.-Apr., 2020, pp. 34-37.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Medvedev, I.B., Gracheva, M.A., Pokrovskiy, D.F. et al. A Comparative Analysis of the Reproducibility of the Results of Visual Acuity Assessment Using Optotype Charts. Biomed Eng 54, 125–129 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10527-020-09988-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10527-020-09988-0

Search

Navigation