Establishment of a normative database and evaluation of the test-retest repeatability of the Spaeth/Richman contrast sensitivity test
To evaluate the test-retest repeatability of a computer-based contrast sensitivity (CS) test, the Spaeth/Richman contrast sensitivity (SPARCS) test, and to determine the effects of age and lens status on CS in normal eyes.
Prospective cross-sectional study.
The participants were assessed by use of the SPARCS test in each eye 3 times. The first 2 sessions were supervised, while the third was unsupervised. CS was determined for 5 areas of vision (central, superotemporal, superonasal, inferotemporal, and inferonasal) and combined to provide a total score. The test-retest repeatability was determined using Bland-Altman analysis and the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC).
The total SPARCS scores (maximum possible score = 100) ranged from 86.37 (±1.09) (for those aged 20 to 29 years) to 70.71 (±2.64) (for those aged 80 to 87 years). Individuals aged between 10 and 87 years with a normal eye examination (n = 205) were enrolled. When the SPARCS scores for the first 2 sessions were compared, the ICC was 0.79, and the repeated tests were fairly equivalent (mean difference = −0.29, P = .491). The test-retest 95% limits of agreement (95% LoA) ranged from −11.07 to +11.35. When the supervised sessions were compared with the unsupervised session, the ICC was 0.80, and there was slight improvement in the CS scores during the unsupervised session (mean difference = −1.15, P = .0001). The test-retest 95% LoA ranged from −9.18 to +10.60. The CS declined with advanced age and increased cataract severity (P <0.0001).
Strong agreement was found between repeated SPARCS scores. Older age and increased lens opacity were associated with decline in CS in 5 areas of the visual field. The SPARCS test provides reliable and reproducible assessment of CS in normal eyes.
KeywordsCataract Contrast sensitivity Healthy participants Normative database Repeatability
This work was supported by the Partridge Foundation (grant # PRT13001).
Conflicts of interest
L. Gupta, None; M. Waisbourd, None; C. T. Sanvicente, None; M. Hsieh, None; S. S. Wizov, None; E. E. Spaeth, P (Spaeth/Richman contrast sensitivity test (SPARCS), No. 8,042,946); J. Richman, P (Spaeth/Richman contrast sensitivity test (SPARCS), No. 8,042,946); G. L. Spaeth, P (Spaeth/Richman Contrast Sensitivity Test (SPARCS), No. 8,042,946).
- 2.West SK, Rubin GS, Broman AT, Munoz B, Bandeen-Roche K, Turano K. How does visual impairment affect performance on tasks of everyday life? The SEE Project. Salisbury Eye Evaluation. Arch Ophthal. 2002;120:774–80.Google Scholar
- 3.Owsley C, Sekuler R, Boldt C. Aging and low-contrast vision: face perception. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1981;21:362–5.Google Scholar
- 11.Kuyk T, Elliott JL. Visual factors and mobility in persons with age-related macular degeneration. J Rehabil Res Dev. 1999;36:303–12.Google Scholar
- 21.Pelli DG, Robson JG, Wilkins AJ. The design of a new letter chart for measuring contrast sensitivity. Clin Vis Sci. 1988;2:187–99.Google Scholar
- 23.Hadavand MB, Heidary F, Heidary R, Gharebaghi R. A modified Middle Eastern contrast sensitivity chart. Med Hypothesis Discov Innov Ophthalmol. 2014;3:17–9.Google Scholar
- 27.Wilkins AJ, Della Sala S, Somazzi L, Nimmo-Smith I. Age-related norms for the Cambridge low contrast gratings, including details concerning their design and use. Clin Vis Sci. 1988;2:201–12.Google Scholar
- 30.Kollbaum PS, Jansen ME, Kollbaum EJ, Bullimore MA. Validation of an iPad test of letter contrast sensitivity. Optom Vis Sci. 2014;91:291–6.Google Scholar
- 32.Spaeth GL, Henderer J, Liu C, Kesen M, Altangerel U, Bayer A, et al. The disc damage likelihood scale: reproducibility of a new method of estimating the amount of optic nerve damage caused by glaucoma. Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc. 2002;100:181–5.Google Scholar
- 36.Rubin GS, West SK, Munoz B, Bandeen-Roche K, Zeger S, Schein O, et al. A comprehensive assessment of visual impairment in a population of older Americans: the SEE Study. Salisbury Eye Evaluation Project. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1997;38:557–68.Google Scholar
- 39.Cheng Y, Shi X, Cao XG, Li XX, Bao YZ. Correlation between contrast sensitivity and the lens opacities classification system III in age-related nuclear and cortical cataracts. Chin Med J. 2013;126:1430–5.Google Scholar