Paula Amores Morillo, Ashli Milling, Anna O'Connor
{"title":"Comparison of current paediatric contrast sensitivity assessments using simulated reduced contrast thresholds.","authors":"Paula Amores Morillo, Ashli Milling, Anna O'Connor","doi":"10.1080/09273972.2023.2250393","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>There are limited tests of contrast sensitivity (CS) for use in children. The Hiding Heidi (HH) is suitable for all cognitive abilities, but has a ceiling effect. The Double Happy (DH) test has comparable thresholds to the Pelli Robson (PR), however the ability to detect changes in contrast has not been established. This study aims to compare contrast thresholds and agreement between HH and the DH, comparing to the PR chart in normal conditions and under reduced visual and lighting conditions.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Tests were repeated under different conditions to reduce the contrast. Room illumination was 20,900{plus minus}2% lux in bright conditions and 2,000{plus minus}2% lux in dim conditions, both conditions were repeated with the addition of simulation spectacles to reduce the clarity of vision. Participants' CS was measured uniocularly using the PR, HH and DH tests.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>50 participants, age 18-62 years (mean{plus minus}standard deviation: 24.5{plus minus}7.98), were assessed. On HH 94% (<i>n</i> = 47) reached the maximum score, with the DH it was 18% (<i>n</i> = 9). The difference in reduction between conditions was smaller with HH in comparison to PR and DH, but significantly different from baseline conditions. Under dim conditions the reduction in PR and DH was -0.21 logCS units, but only -0.04 logCS for HH.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The DH test has better agreement with PR than HH and is better at detecting CS changes, highlighting the advantages of use in clinical practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":51700,"journal":{"name":"Strabismus","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Strabismus","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09273972.2023.2250393","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/11/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose: There are limited tests of contrast sensitivity (CS) for use in children. The Hiding Heidi (HH) is suitable for all cognitive abilities, but has a ceiling effect. The Double Happy (DH) test has comparable thresholds to the Pelli Robson (PR), however the ability to detect changes in contrast has not been established. This study aims to compare contrast thresholds and agreement between HH and the DH, comparing to the PR chart in normal conditions and under reduced visual and lighting conditions.
Methods: Tests were repeated under different conditions to reduce the contrast. Room illumination was 20,900{plus minus}2% lux in bright conditions and 2,000{plus minus}2% lux in dim conditions, both conditions were repeated with the addition of simulation spectacles to reduce the clarity of vision. Participants' CS was measured uniocularly using the PR, HH and DH tests.
Results: 50 participants, age 18-62 years (mean{plus minus}standard deviation: 24.5{plus minus}7.98), were assessed. On HH 94% (n = 47) reached the maximum score, with the DH it was 18% (n = 9). The difference in reduction between conditions was smaller with HH in comparison to PR and DH, but significantly different from baseline conditions. Under dim conditions the reduction in PR and DH was -0.21 logCS units, but only -0.04 logCS for HH.
Conclusion: The DH test has better agreement with PR than HH and is better at detecting CS changes, highlighting the advantages of use in clinical practice.