Impact of blur on clinical and occupational colour vision test results.

IF 2.8 3区 医学 Q1 OPHTHALMOLOGY Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics Pub Date : 2024-09-01 Epub Date: 2024-06-21 DOI:10.1111/opo.13350
Leticia Álvaro, Monika A Formankiewicz, Sarah J Waugh
{"title":"Impact of blur on clinical and occupational colour vision test results.","authors":"Leticia Álvaro, Monika A Formankiewicz, Sarah J Waugh","doi":"10.1111/opo.13350","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To evaluate whether colour vision normal (CVN) adults pass two Fletcher-Evans (CAM) lantern tests and to investigate the impact of imposed blur on Ishihara, CAM lantern and computerised colour discrimination test (colour assessment and diagnosis test [CAD] and Cambridge colour test [CCT]) results.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In a pilot experiment, 20 (16 CVN and 4 colour vision deficient [CVD]) participants with normal VA were tested with the CAM lantern. In the main experiment, the impact of imposed dioptric blur (up to +8.00 D) on visual acuity and the Ishihara test, CAM lantern, CAD and CCT was assessed for 15 CVN participants.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>CVN participants can fail the CAM lantern, with specificity of 81.25% (aviation mode) and 75% (clinical mode), despite following the test requirements of participants having at least 0.18 logMAR (6/9) in the better eye. With blur, test accuracy was affected. As expected, significant detrimental effects of blur on test results were found for logMAR VA and CAM lantern (aviation) with +1.00 D or higher. Ishihara, CAD and CCT results were not detrimentally affected until +8.00 D. Yellow-blue discrimination was more affected by blur for the CAD than the CCT, which was not explained by the different colour spaces used or vectors tested.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>False-positive findings on lantern colour vision tests with small apertures are likely to be increased in patients with blur due to uncorrected refractive error or ocular and visual pathway disease. Other colour vision tests with larger stimuli are more robust to blur.</p>","PeriodicalId":19522,"journal":{"name":"Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/opo.13350","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: To evaluate whether colour vision normal (CVN) adults pass two Fletcher-Evans (CAM) lantern tests and to investigate the impact of imposed blur on Ishihara, CAM lantern and computerised colour discrimination test (colour assessment and diagnosis test [CAD] and Cambridge colour test [CCT]) results.

Methods: In a pilot experiment, 20 (16 CVN and 4 colour vision deficient [CVD]) participants with normal VA were tested with the CAM lantern. In the main experiment, the impact of imposed dioptric blur (up to +8.00 D) on visual acuity and the Ishihara test, CAM lantern, CAD and CCT was assessed for 15 CVN participants.

Results: CVN participants can fail the CAM lantern, with specificity of 81.25% (aviation mode) and 75% (clinical mode), despite following the test requirements of participants having at least 0.18 logMAR (6/9) in the better eye. With blur, test accuracy was affected. As expected, significant detrimental effects of blur on test results were found for logMAR VA and CAM lantern (aviation) with +1.00 D or higher. Ishihara, CAD and CCT results were not detrimentally affected until +8.00 D. Yellow-blue discrimination was more affected by blur for the CAD than the CCT, which was not explained by the different colour spaces used or vectors tested.

Conclusion: False-positive findings on lantern colour vision tests with small apertures are likely to be increased in patients with blur due to uncorrected refractive error or ocular and visual pathway disease. Other colour vision tests with larger stimuli are more robust to blur.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
模糊对临床和职业色觉测试结果的影响。
目的:评估色觉正常(CVN)成年人是否能通过两项弗莱彻-埃文斯(CAM)灯笼测试,并研究外加模糊对石原、CAM 灯笼和计算机化色彩分辨测试(色彩评估和诊断测试 [CAD] 和剑桥色彩测试 [CCT])结果的影响:在试点实验中,20 名视力正常的参与者(16 名色盲和 4 名色弱)接受了 CAM 灯测试。在主要实验中,对 15 名 CVN 参与者的视力和石原试验、CAM 灯、CAD 和 CCT 的影响进行了评估:结果:尽管测试要求参与者较好的眼睛视力至少达到 0.18 logMAR (6/9),但 CVN 参与者可能无法通过 CAM 灯笼测试,特异性为 81.25%(航空模式)和 75%(临床模式)。模糊会影响测试的准确性。正如预期的那样,模糊对测试结果的不利影响主要体现在 VA 对数和 CAM 光源(航空)+1.00 D 或更高。在 +8.00 D 之前,石原、CAD 和 CCT 结果不会受到不利影响。与 CCT 相比,CAD 受模糊影响更大,而使用的色彩空间或测试的向量不同并不能解释这种情况:结论:小光圈灯笼色觉测试的假阳性结果在因未矫正屈光不正或眼部和视觉通路疾病导致模糊的患者中可能会增加。其他刺激物较大的色觉测试对模糊的影响更大。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
13.80%
发文量
135
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Ophthalmic & Physiological Optics, first published in 1925, is a leading international interdisciplinary journal that addresses basic and applied questions pertinent to contemporary research in vision science and optometry. OPO publishes original research papers, technical notes, reviews and letters and will interest researchers, educators and clinicians concerned with the development, use and restoration of vision.
期刊最新文献
Refractive development II: Modelling normal and myopic eye growth. What intrinsic factors affect the central corneal thickness? The effect of lens and fitting characteristics upon scleral lens centration. Recommended improvements to the statistical guidelines. Exploring the relationship between 24-2 visual field and widefield optical coherence tomography data across healthy, glaucoma suspect and glaucoma eyes.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1