Advertisement

Feasibility of the Radner Reading Charts in low-vision patients

  • Marloes C. BurggraaffEmail author
  • Ruth M. A. van Nispen
  • Sharon Hoek
  • Dirk L. Knol
  • Ger H. M. B. van Rens
Low Vision

Abstract

Background

Being unable to read is a major problem for visually impaired patients. Since distance visual acuity (VA) does not adequately reflect reading ability, it is important to also evaluate near VA. The Radner Reading Charts (RRCs) are available to measure patients’ reading performance. The present study tested the inter-chart and test-retest reliability of the RRCs in Dutch low-vision patients (i.e., visual acuity ≥0.3 logMAR) with various eye disorders.

Methods

Thirty-eight patients read the three RRCs in random order. Then, about 1 month after the initial measurements, a test-retest procedure was performed in 15 of the 38 patients. Tested variables were reading acuity (logRAD), logRAD score, logRAD/logMAR ratio, maximum reading speed (MRS), and critical print size (CPS). Both MRS and CPS were calculated in two different ways. To determine the variability, a mixed-model analysis was used.

Results

For all variables, the largest part of the variance was explained by the individual subject (86–89%) whereas the chart accounted for only 0–0.78% of the variability. Therefore, the inter-chart and test-retest reliability was high, except for the CPS which had a poor to moderate reliability (31–62%) when calculated in the two different ways.

Conclusions

The inter-chart and test-retest results showed high reliability in patients with low vision due to various diseases; therefore, the charts are feasible to determine effects in large groups.

Keywords

Radner Reading Charts Reliability Low vision Reading acuity 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors thank Michiel Panhuysen, Gabriëlle Janssen, and Tamara Brusee for their help in recruiting patients, measuring distance VA, and providing optimal refractive corrections.

Funding

This study was supported by a grant from ZonMw InZicht (the Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development-InSight Society) and the Catholic Foundation for the Blind and Visually Impaired. The authors have no financial interest in the Radner Reading Charts and did not receive any royalties for its sale.

Supplementary material

417_2010_1402_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (7.3 mb)
ESM 1 (PDF 7456 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Rinnert T, Lindner H, Behrens-Baumann W (1999) At home utilization of low-vision aids by the visually impaired. Klin Monatsbl Augenheilkd 215:305–310CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Elliott DB, Hurst MA, Weatherill J (1990) Comparing clinical tests of visual function in cataract with the patient's perceived visual disability. Eye 4:712–717PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Legge GE, Ross JA, Isenberg LM, LaMay JM (1992) Psychophysics of reading. Clinical predictors of low-vision reading speed. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 33:677–687PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Richter-Mueksch S, Stur M, Stifter E, Radner W (2006) Differences in reading performance of patients with Drusen maculopathy and subretinal fibrosis after CNV. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 244:154–162CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Maaijwee KJM, Mulder P, Radner W, Van Meurs JC (2008) Reliability testing of the Dutch version of the Radner Reading Charts. Optom Vis Sci 85:353–358CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Sloan LL, Brown DJ (1963) Reading cards for selection of optical aids for the partially sighted. Am J Ophthalmol 55:1187Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bailey IL, Lovie JE (1980) The design and use of a new near-vision chart. Am J Optom Physiol Opt 57:378–387PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Mansfield J, Ahn S, Legge G, Leubker A (1993) A new reading-acuity charts for normal and low vision. Opt Soc Am Tech Digest 3:232–235Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ahn SJ, Legge GE, Luebker A (1995) Printed cards for measuring low-vision reading speed. Vis Res 35:1939–1944CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Radner W, Willinger U, Obermayer W, Mudrich C, Velikay-Parel M, Eisenwort B (1998) A new German Reading Chart for the simultaneous evaluation of reading acuity and reading speed. Klin Monatsbl Augenheilkd 213:174–181CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Maaijwee KJM, Meulendijks CFM, Radner W, Van Meurs JC, Hoyng CB (2007) The Dutch version of the Radner Reading Chart for assessing vision function. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd 151:2494–2497PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Alió JL, Radner W, Plaza-Puche AB, Ortiz D, Neipp MC, Quilles MJ, Rodríguez-Marín J (2008) Design of short Spanish sentences for measuring reading performance: Radner-Vissum test. J Cataract Refract Surg 34:638–642CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Radner W (2008) Introducing a new reading chart. Ophthalmol Times Eur 4:174–181Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kooijman AC, Beerthuizen JJG (1996) [Juego de optotipos, unidad-M, para la lectura]. In: Vision '96: Proceedings of the International Low Vision Conference 1996. Book I. ONCE, Madrid, pp 39–44Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Radner W, Obermayer W, Richter-Mueksch S, Willinger U, Velikay-Parel M, Eisenwort B (2002) The validity and reliability of short German sentences for measuring reading speed. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 240:461–467CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Stifter E, Konig F, Lang T, Bauer P, Richter-Muesck S, Velikay-Parel M, Radner W (2004) Reliability of a standardized reading chart system: variance component analysis, test-retest and inter-chart reliability. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 242:31–39CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Resnikoff S, Pascolini D, Etya'ale D, Kocur I, Pararajasegaram R, Pokharel GP, Mariotti SP (2004) Global data on visual impairment in the year 2002. Bull WHO 82:844–851PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Charman WN (1985) Visual standards for driving. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 5:211–220CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    De Boer MR, Langelaan M, Jansonius NM, van Rens GH (2005) Evidence-based guidelines on the referral of visually impaired persons to low vision services. Eur J Ophthalmol 15:400–406PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    De Boer MR, Langelaan M, Jansonius NM, van Rens GH (2005) Referral for rehabilitation in case of permanent visual handicap; guideline of the Dutch Society of Ophthalmology. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd 149:1502–1504PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    John PWM (1971) Statistical design and analysis of experiments. The Macmillan Company, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Cheung SH, Kallie CS, Legge GE, Cheong AM (2008) Nonlinear mixed-effects modelling of MNREAD data. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 49:828–835CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Subramanian A, Pardhan S (2009) How repeatable are indices of reading ability in subjects with impaired vision? Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 83:572–576Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Rubin DB (1976) Inference and missing data. Biometrika 63:581–592CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Molenberghs G, Thijs H, Jansen I, Beunckens C, Kenward MG, Mallinckrodt C (2004) Analyzing incomplete longitudinal clinical trial data. Biostatistics 5:445–464CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Beunckens C, Molenberghs G, Kenward MG (2005) Direct likelihood analysis versus simple forms of imputation for missing data in randomized controlled trials. Clin Trials 2:379–386CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Burggraaff MC, Van Nispen RMA, Melis-Dankers BJM, Van Rens GHMB (2010) Effects of a standard training in the use of closed-circuit televisions in visually impaired adults: design of a training protocol and a randomized controlled trail. BMC Health Serv Res. doi: 77872658834458815 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Mansfield JS, Legge GE (2008) To the editor: Reliability testing of the Dutch version of the Radner Reading Charts. Optom Vis Sci 85:1201–1202CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Maaijwee K, Radner W, van Meurs JC (2008) Author's response. Optom Vis Sci 85:1202–1204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Patel PJ, Chen FK, Rubin GS, Tufail A (2008) Intersession repeatability of visual acuity scores in age-related macular degeneration. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 49:4347–4352CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    National Research Committee on Vision (1980) Recommended standard procedures for the clinical measurement and specification of visual acuity. Adv Ophthalmol 41:103–148Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Bland JM, Altman DG (1986) Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1:307–310PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Nunnally JC (1967) Psychometric theory. McGraw Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Raasch TW, Flom RE (1994) Precision of visual acuity measurement in low vision. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 35:1413Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Marloes C. Burggraaff
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Ruth M. A. van Nispen
    • 1
    • 2
  • Sharon Hoek
    • 1
    • 2
  • Dirk L. Knol
    • 3
  • Ger H. M. B. van Rens
    • 1
    • 4
  1. 1.Department of OphthalmologyVU University Medical CenterAmsterdamThe Netherlands
  2. 2.EMGO Institute for Health and Care ResearchVU University Medical CenterAmsterdamThe Netherlands
  3. 3.Department of Epidemiology and BiostatisticsVU University Medical CenterAmsterdamThe Netherlands
  4. 4.Department of OphthalmologyElkerliek HospitalHelmondThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations