Japanese Journal of Ophthalmology

, Volume 59, Issue 2, pp 94–102 | Cite as

Areas of the visual field important during reading in patients with glaucoma

Clinical Investigation



To determine the areas of the binocular visual field (VF) associated with reading speed in glaucomatous patients with preserved visual acuity (VA).

Materials and methods

Fifty-four patients with glaucoma (mean age ± standard deviation 70 ± 8 years) and 38 visually healthy controls (mean age 66 ± 9 years) had silent reading speeds measured using non-scrolling text on a computer setup. Participants completed three cognitive tests and tests of visual function, including the Humphrey 24-2 threshold VF test in each eye; the results were combined to produce binocular integrated VFs (IVFs). Regression analyses using the control group to correct for cognitive test scores, age and VA were conducted to obtain the IVF mean deviation (MD) and total deviation (TD) value from each IVF test location. Concordance between reading speed and TD, assessed using R2 statistics, was ranked in order of importance to explore the parts of the IVF most likely to be linked with reading speed.


No significant association between IVF MD value and reading speed was observed (p = 0.38). Ranking individual thresholds indicated that the inferior left section of the IVF was most likely to be associated with reading speed.


Certain regions of the binocular VF impairment may be associated with reading performance even in patients with preserved VA. The inferior left region of patient IVFs may be important for changing lines during reading.


Reading Glaucoma Visual fields Quality of life 


  1. 1.
    Aspinall PA, Johnson ZK, Azuara-Blanco A, Montarzino A, Brice R, Vickers A. Evaluation of quality of life and priorities of patients with glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2008;49:1907–15.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gutierrez PR, Wilson MR, Johnson CA, Gordon M, Cioffi GA, Ritch R, et al. Influence of glaucomatous visual field loss on health-related quality of life. Arch Ophthalmol. 1997;115:777–84.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Parrish RK 2nd, Gedde SJ, Scott IU, Feuer WJ, Schiffman JC, Mangione CM, et al. Visual function and quality of life among patients with glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol. 1997;115:1447–55.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lee BL, Gutierrez PR, Gordon MO, Wilson MR, Cioffi GA, Ritch R, et al. The glaucoma symptom scale: a brief index of glaucoma-specific symptoms. Arch Ophthalmol. 1998;116:861–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Mangione CM, Berry S, Spritzer K, Janz NK, Klein R, Owsley C, et al. Identifying the content area for the 51-item national eye institute visual function questionnaire: results from focus groups with visually impaired persons. Arch Ophthalmol. 1998;116:227–33.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Nelson P, Aspinall P, O’Brien C. Patients’ perception of visual impairment in glaucoma: a pilot study. Br J Ophthalmol. 1999;83:546–52.CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Janz NK, Wren PA, Lichter PR, Musch DC, Gillespie BW, Guire KE. Quality of life in newly diagnosed glaucoma patients: the collaborative initial glaucoma treatment study. Ophthalmology. 2001;108:887–97.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Altangerel UMD, Spaeth GLM, Rhee DJM. Visual function, disability, and psychological impact of glaucoma. Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2003;14:100–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Spaeth GLM, Walt JG, Keener J. Evaluation of quality of life for patients with glaucoma. Am J Ophthalmol. 2006;141:3–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Freeman EE, Munoz B, West SK, Jampel HD, Friedman DS. Glaucoma and quality of life: the salisbury eye evaluation. Ophthalmology. 2008;115:233–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Altangerel UMD, Spaeth GLM, Steinmann WC. Assessment of function relation to vision (AFREV). Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 2006;13:67–80.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Burton R, Crabb DP, Smith ND, Glen FC, Garway-Heath DF. Glaucoma and reading: exploring the effects of contrast lowering of text. Optom Vis Sci. 2012;89:1282–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ramulu PY, West SK, Munoz B, Jampel HD, Friedman DS. Glaucoma and reading speed: the salisbury eye evaluation project. Arch Ophthalmol. 2009;127:82–7.CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ramulu PY, Swenor BK, Jefferys JL, Friedman DS, Rubin GS. Difficulty with out-loud and silent reading in glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2013;54(1):666–72.CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Roberts KF, Haymes SA, LeBlanc RP, Nicolela MT, Chauhan BC, Artes PH. Contrast sensitivity, visual acuity, reading speed and macular visual field damage in glaucoma. The Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology Annual Meeting. Ft Lauderdale. 2005.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    West SK, Rubin GS, Broman AT, Munoz B, Bandeen-Roche K, Turano KA. How does visual impairment affect performance on tasks of everyday life? The SEE project salisbury eye evaluation. Arch Ophthalmol. 2002;120:774–80.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Whittaker SG, Lovie-Kitchin JE. Visual requirements for reading. Optom Vis Sci. 1993;70:54–65.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Tabrett DR, Lathan K. Important areas of the central binocular visual field for daily functioning in the visually impaired. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 2012;32:156–63.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Murata H, Hirasawa H, Aoyama Y, Sugisaki K, Araie M, Mayama C, et al. Identifying areas of the visual field important for quality of life in patients with glaucoma. PLoS One. 2013;8:1–7.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Cummings RW, Rubin GS. Reading speed and saccadic eye movements with an artifical paracentral scotoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1993;34:1318.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ishii M, Seki M, Harigai R, Abe H, Fukuchi T. Reading performance in patients with glaucoma evaluated using the MNREAD charts. Jpn J Ophthalmol. 2013;57(5):471–4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kind P. The EuroQol instrument: an index of health-related quality of life. Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven; 1996.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Crabb DP, Viswanathan AC. Integrated visual fields: a new approach to measuring the binocular field of view and visual disability. Graefe’s Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2005;54:1169–75.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Asaoka R, Crabb DP, Yamashita T, Russell RA, Wang YX, Garway-Heath DF. Patients have two eyes!: binocular versus better eye visual field indices. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2011;52:7007–11.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    R Development Core Team. R: a language and environment for statistical computing. Available at: http://www.R-project.org/. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna. 2012.
  26. 26.
    Asaoka R, Garway-Heath DF, Wang YX, Russell RA, Crabb DP. The precision of 5 year forecasts of the visual field index (VFI) using series of monocular and binocular visual fields. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2013;251:1335–41.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Flesch R. A new readability yardstick. J Appl Psychol. 1948;32:221–33.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Mills RP, Drance SM. Esterman disability rating in severe glaucoma. Ophthalmology. 1986;93:371–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Viswanathan AC, McNaught AI, Poinoosaumy D, Fontana L, Crabb DP, Fitzke FW, et al. Severity and stability of glaucoma: patient perception compared with objective measurement. Arch Ophthalmol. 1999;117:450–4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Iester M, Zingirian M. Quality of life in patients with early, moderate and advanced glaucoma. Eye. 2002;16:44–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Petre KL, Hazel CA, Fine EM, Rubin GS. Reading with eccentric fixation is faster in inferior visual field than in left visual field. Optom Vis Sci. 2000;77:34–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Legge GE, Pelli DG, Rubin GS, Schleske MM. Psychophysics of reading—I. Normal vision. Vision Res. 1985;25:239–52.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Rubin GS, Turano KA. Low vision reading with sequential word presentation. Vision Res. 1994;34:1723–33.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Sumi I, Shirato S, Matsumoto S, Araie M. The relationship between visual disability and visual field in patients with glaucoma. Ophthalmology. 2003;110:332–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Chan EW, Chiang PPC, Wong TY, Saw SM, Loon SC, Aung T, et al. Impact of glaucoma severity and laterality on vision-specific functioning: the Singapore Malay eye study. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2013;54:1169–75.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Saunders LJ, Russell RA, Crabb DP. Practical landmarks for visual field disability in glaucoma. Br J Ophthalmol. 2012;96:1185–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Glen FC, Crabb DP, Smith ND, Burton R, Garway-Heath DF. Do patients with glaucoma have difficulty recognising faces? Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2012;53:3629–37.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Esterman B. Functional scoring of the binocular field. Ophthalmology. 1982;89:1226–34.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Jampel HD, Friedman DS, Quigley HA, Miller R. Correlation of the binocular visual field with patient assessment of vision. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2002;43:1059–67.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Owen VMF, Crabb DP, White ET, Viswanathan AC, Garway-Heath DF, Hitchings RA. Glaucoma and fitness to drive: using binocular visual fields to predict a milestone to blindness. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2008;49:2449–55.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Kotecha A, O’Leary N, Melmoth D, Grant S, Crabb DP. The functional consequences of glaucoma for eye-hand coordination. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2009;50:203–13.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Crabb DP, Viswanathan AC, McNaught AI, Poinoosaumy D, Fitzke FW, Hitchings RA. Simulating binocular visual field status in glaucoma. Br J Ophthalmol. 1998;82:1236–41.CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Bengtsson B, Heijl A. A visual field index for calculation of glaucoma rate of progression. Am J Ophthalmol. 2008;145:343–53.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Artes PH, O’Leary N, Hutchison DM, Heckler L, Sharpe GP, Nicolela MT, et al. Properties of the statpac visual field index. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2011;52:4030–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Japanese Ophthalmological Society 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Robyn Burton
    • 1
  • Luke J. Saunders
    • 1
  • David P. Crabb
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Optometry and Visual ScienceCity University LondonLondonUK

Personalised recommendations