Comparing Visual Acuity Measured by Lea Symbols and Patti Pics

Eric L. Singman, N. Matta, Jing Tian, D. Silbert
{"title":"Comparing Visual Acuity Measured by Lea Symbols and Patti Pics","authors":"Eric L. Singman, N. Matta, Jing Tian, D. Silbert","doi":"10.3368/aoj.65.1.94","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction There is little data validating most illiterate eye charts. Lea Symbols®, however, have been well validated in numerous studies. In this study, we compare the assessment of visual acuity employing both the Lea Symbol hanging wall Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS)-style chart and a similar Patti Pics® ETDRS-style chart in order to determine whether the two charts provide clinically similar data. Methods We tested the vision of the right eyes of fifty-two consecutive patients. Patients were cooperative children or adults between the ages of 3 and 88 years (mean 58 years). We alternated the order of the chart used first. Patients were also categorized by age and by visual acuity. Results The visual acuities measured by the two charts were equal for 83% of the measurements (forty-three eyes). In 8% of eyes (four eyes), the visual acuity measured with the Lea Symbols was one line better than that measured by the Patti Pics; in 9% of eyes (five eyes), the acuity from the Patti Pics chart measured one line better than the Lea Symbols. There was no difference in measurements for either adults or children or among patients with different visual acuities. Conclusion We believe this study will serve to provide useful information when choosing an eye chart to assess visual acuity in a clinic setting. Patti Pics performed similarly to Lea Symbols in adults and children tested in a multi-specialty ophthalmology practice. We suspect that it would also perform similarly in the primary care and school settings.","PeriodicalId":76599,"journal":{"name":"The American orthoptic journal","volume":"65 1","pages":"94 - 98"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.3368/aoj.65.1.94","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The American orthoptic journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3368/aoj.65.1.94","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

Abstract

Introduction There is little data validating most illiterate eye charts. Lea Symbols®, however, have been well validated in numerous studies. In this study, we compare the assessment of visual acuity employing both the Lea Symbol hanging wall Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS)-style chart and a similar Patti Pics® ETDRS-style chart in order to determine whether the two charts provide clinically similar data. Methods We tested the vision of the right eyes of fifty-two consecutive patients. Patients were cooperative children or adults between the ages of 3 and 88 years (mean 58 years). We alternated the order of the chart used first. Patients were also categorized by age and by visual acuity. Results The visual acuities measured by the two charts were equal for 83% of the measurements (forty-three eyes). In 8% of eyes (four eyes), the visual acuity measured with the Lea Symbols was one line better than that measured by the Patti Pics; in 9% of eyes (five eyes), the acuity from the Patti Pics chart measured one line better than the Lea Symbols. There was no difference in measurements for either adults or children or among patients with different visual acuities. Conclusion We believe this study will serve to provide useful information when choosing an eye chart to assess visual acuity in a clinic setting. Patti Pics performed similarly to Lea Symbols in adults and children tested in a multi-specialty ophthalmology practice. We suspect that it would also perform similarly in the primary care and school settings.
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
Lea符号与Patti图像测量的视敏度比较
很少有数据证实大多数文盲的视力表。然而,Lea Symbols®已经在许多研究中得到了很好的验证。在本研究中,我们比较了Lea Symbol悬挂墙早期治疗糖尿病视网膜病变研究(ETDRS)风格图表和类似的Patti Pics®ETDRS风格图表对视力的评估,以确定这两种图表是否提供了相似的临床数据。方法对52例患者进行右眼视力检查。患者为3 ~ 88岁(平均58岁)的合作儿童或成人。我们交替了先使用的图表的顺序。患者也按年龄和视力进行分类。结果两种方法测得的43只眼的视力有83%相等。8%的眼(4只眼)用Lea符号测得的视力比Patti图测得的好一行;在9%的眼睛(5只眼睛)中,Patti图片图表的敏锐度比Lea符号高出一条线。无论是成人还是儿童,还是不同视力的患者,测量结果都没有差异。结论本研究将为临床上选择视力表评估视力提供有用的信息。在多专科眼科实践中,Patti Pics在成人和儿童中的表现与Lea Symbols相似。我们怀疑它在初级保健和学校环境中也会有类似的效果。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Double Elevator Palsy, Ptosis, and Jaw Winking Neuro-Visual Torticollis and its Congeners Binocular Problems in Bitemporal Hemianopsia Refractive Changes following Strabismus Surgery Visual Acuity of Infants and Young Children: Forced-Choice Preferential Looking Procedures
×
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