Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorPesudovs, Konrad
dc.contributor.authorHazel, Charlotte A
dc.contributor.authorDoran, Robert M L
dc.contributor.authorElliott, David B
dc.date.accessioned2006-06-20
dc.date.available2006-06-20
dc.date.issued2004-01
dc.identifier.citationK Pesudovs, CA Hazel, RML Doran and DB Elliott 2004. The Usefulness of Vistech and FACT contrast sensitivity charts for cataract and refractive surgery outcomes research. 'British Journal of Ophthalmology, January, Vol. 88, No. 1, 11-6en
dc.identifier.issn0007-1161
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2328/995
dc.description.abstractAIM: To investigate the repeatability and sensitivity of two commonly used sine wave patch charts for contrast sensitivity (CS) measurement in cataract and refractive surgery outcomes. METHODS: The Vistech CS chart and its descendant, the Functional Acuity Contrast Test (FACT), were administered in three experiments: (1) Post-LASIK and age matched normal subjects; (2) Preoperative cataract surgery and age matched normal subjects; (3) Test-retest repeatability data in normal subjects. RESULTS: Contrast sensitivity was similar between post-LASIK and control groups and between the Vistech and FACT charts. The percentage of subjects one month post-LASIK achieving the maximum score across spatial frequencies (1.5, 3, 6, 12, 18 cycles per degree) were (50, 33, 13, 13, 0 respectively) for FACT, but only (0, 0, 13, 4, 0 respectively) for Vistech. A small number of cataract patients also registered the maximum score on the FACT, but up to 60% did not achieve the minimum score. Test-retest intraclass correlation coefficients varied from 0.28 to 0.64 for Vistech and 0.18 to 0.45 for FACT. Bland-Altman limits of agreement across spatial frequencies were between +/-0.30 and +/-0.85 logCS for Vistech, and +/-0.30 to +/-0.75 logCS for FACT. DISCUSSION: The Vistech was confirmed as providing poorly repeatable data. The FACT chart, likely because of a smaller step size, showed slightly better retest agreement. However, the reduced range of scores on the chart due to the smaller step size led to ceiling (post-LASIK) and floor (cataract) effects. These problems could mask subtle differences between groups of patients with near normal visual function as found post-refractive or cataract surgery. The Vistech and FACT CS charts are ill suited for refractive or cataract surgery outcomes research.en
dc.format.extent241898 bytes
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherBMJ Publishing Group - http://bjo.bmjjournals.com/en
dc.subjectCataracten
dc.subjectCataract Extractionen
dc.subjectComparative Studyen
dc.subjectContrast Sensitivityen
dc.subjectFactor Analysis, Statisticalen
dc.subjectKeratomileusis, Laser In Situen
dc.subjectMyopiaen
dc.subjectReproducibility of Resultsen
dc.subjectResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov'ten
dc.subjectSensitivity and Specificityen
dc.subjectTreatment Outcomeen
dc.subjectVision Testsen
dc.subjectVisual Acuityen
dc.subject.otherAustralian Standard Research Classification 321016 Ophthalmology and Vision Scienceen
dc.titleThe usefulness of Vistech and FACT contrast sensitivity charts for cataract and refractive surgery outcomes researchen
dc.typeArticleen
dc.rights.licenseIn Copyright


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record