扫描视觉诱发电位测试与主观视觉敏锐度的一致性评价。

Osman Ahmet Polat, Hidayet Şener, Zekeriya Çetinkaya, Hatice Arda
{"title":"扫描视觉诱发电位测试与主观视觉敏锐度的一致性评价。","authors":"Osman Ahmet Polat,&nbsp;Hidayet Şener,&nbsp;Zekeriya Çetinkaya,&nbsp;Hatice Arda","doi":"10.4274/tjo.galenos.2023.37622","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the agreement of visual acuity (VA) obtained with the sweep visual evoked potential (sVEP) method with the VA obtained with the Snellen chart. The secondary objective was to examine the effect of age and gender on agreement.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Best corrected VAs of subjects were recorded with the Snellen chart, and sVEP testing was performed according to the recommendations of the International Society for Clinical Electrophysiology of Vision (ISCEV). Snellen VAs and sVEP measurements were analyzed using logMAR conversion for statistical analysis. Agreement was evaluated with Bland-Altman analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The study included 49 subjects with a mean age of 53.5±17.3 years (range: 19-75 years) and mean Snellen VA of 0.31±0.32 logMAR (range: 1.3-0.0 logMAR). In the Bland-Altman analysis, the mean differences between the VA and sVEP measurements (VA-sVEP) were significantly different and outside the limits of agreement (p=0.035). A significant proportional bias (p=0.0007) was found in the regression analysis performed between VA-sVEP and the mean VA. According to the Bland-Altman analysis of sex subgroups, there was a significant difference between VA and sVEP measurements in female subjects (p=0.006). The difference between VA and sVEP measurement increased significantly with older age (R<sup>2</sup>: 0.306, p<0.001, β: 0.05 [0.03, 0.08]).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In conclusion, sVEP measurements and VAs did not show statistical agreement. Cranial anatomy and endocrine differences of the subjects may affect their sVEP measurements. The difference between the methods varies according to VA level. Directly using sVEP results instead of VA would not be appropriate.</p>","PeriodicalId":23373,"journal":{"name":"Turkish Journal of Ophthalmology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/09/14/TJO-53-289.PMC10599336.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluation of Agreement Between Sweep Visual Evoked Potential Testing and Subjective Visual Acuity.\",\"authors\":\"Osman Ahmet Polat,&nbsp;Hidayet Şener,&nbsp;Zekeriya Çetinkaya,&nbsp;Hatice Arda\",\"doi\":\"10.4274/tjo.galenos.2023.37622\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the agreement of visual acuity (VA) obtained with the sweep visual evoked potential (sVEP) method with the VA obtained with the Snellen chart. The secondary objective was to examine the effect of age and gender on agreement.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Best corrected VAs of subjects were recorded with the Snellen chart, and sVEP testing was performed according to the recommendations of the International Society for Clinical Electrophysiology of Vision (ISCEV). Snellen VAs and sVEP measurements were analyzed using logMAR conversion for statistical analysis. Agreement was evaluated with Bland-Altman analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The study included 49 subjects with a mean age of 53.5±17.3 years (range: 19-75 years) and mean Snellen VA of 0.31±0.32 logMAR (range: 1.3-0.0 logMAR). In the Bland-Altman analysis, the mean differences between the VA and sVEP measurements (VA-sVEP) were significantly different and outside the limits of agreement (p=0.035). A significant proportional bias (p=0.0007) was found in the regression analysis performed between VA-sVEP and the mean VA. According to the Bland-Altman analysis of sex subgroups, there was a significant difference between VA and sVEP measurements in female subjects (p=0.006). The difference between VA and sVEP measurement increased significantly with older age (R<sup>2</sup>: 0.306, p<0.001, β: 0.05 [0.03, 0.08]).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In conclusion, sVEP measurements and VAs did not show statistical agreement. Cranial anatomy and endocrine differences of the subjects may affect their sVEP measurements. The difference between the methods varies according to VA level. Directly using sVEP results instead of VA would not be appropriate.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23373,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Turkish Journal of Ophthalmology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/09/14/TJO-53-289.PMC10599336.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Turkish Journal of Ophthalmology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4274/tjo.galenos.2023.37622\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Turkish Journal of Ophthalmology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4274/tjo.galenos.2023.37622","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:本研究的主要目的是评估扫描视觉诱发电位(sVEP)法获得的视力(VA)与Snellen图获得的VA的一致性。次要目的是研究年龄和性别对协议的影响。材料和方法:用Snellen图记录受试者的最佳校正VA,并根据国际临床视觉电生理学会(ISCEV)的建议进行sVEP测试。使用logMAR转换进行统计分析,分析Snellen VA和sVEP测量值。通过Bland-Altman分析评估一致性。结果:该研究包括49名受试者,平均年龄为53.5±17.3岁(范围:19-75岁),平均Snellen VA为0.31±0.32 logMAR(范围:1.3-0.0 logMAR)。在Bland-Altman分析中,VA和sVEP测量值之间的平均差异(VA-sVEP)显著不同,并且超出了一致性范围(p=0.035)。在VA-sVEP和平均VA之间进行的回归分析中发现了显著的比例偏差(p=0.0007)。根据Bland-Al特曼对性别亚组的分析,女性受试者的VA和sVEP测量值之间存在显著差异(p=0.006)。VA和sVEP测量值的差异随着年龄的增长而显著增加(R2:0.306,P结论:总之,sVEP测量和VA没有显示出统计学上的一致性。受试者的颅骨解剖和内分泌差异可能会影响他们的sVEP的测量。两种方法之间的差异根据VA水平而不同。直接使用sVEP结果而不是VA是不合适的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

摘要图片

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
Evaluation of Agreement Between Sweep Visual Evoked Potential Testing and Subjective Visual Acuity.

Objectives: The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the agreement of visual acuity (VA) obtained with the sweep visual evoked potential (sVEP) method with the VA obtained with the Snellen chart. The secondary objective was to examine the effect of age and gender on agreement.

Materials and methods: Best corrected VAs of subjects were recorded with the Snellen chart, and sVEP testing was performed according to the recommendations of the International Society for Clinical Electrophysiology of Vision (ISCEV). Snellen VAs and sVEP measurements were analyzed using logMAR conversion for statistical analysis. Agreement was evaluated with Bland-Altman analysis.

Results: The study included 49 subjects with a mean age of 53.5±17.3 years (range: 19-75 years) and mean Snellen VA of 0.31±0.32 logMAR (range: 1.3-0.0 logMAR). In the Bland-Altman analysis, the mean differences between the VA and sVEP measurements (VA-sVEP) were significantly different and outside the limits of agreement (p=0.035). A significant proportional bias (p=0.0007) was found in the regression analysis performed between VA-sVEP and the mean VA. According to the Bland-Altman analysis of sex subgroups, there was a significant difference between VA and sVEP measurements in female subjects (p=0.006). The difference between VA and sVEP measurement increased significantly with older age (R2: 0.306, p<0.001, β: 0.05 [0.03, 0.08]).

Conclusion: In conclusion, sVEP measurements and VAs did not show statistical agreement. Cranial anatomy and endocrine differences of the subjects may affect their sVEP measurements. The difference between the methods varies according to VA level. Directly using sVEP results instead of VA would not be appropriate.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Turkish Journal of Ophthalmology
Turkish Journal of Ophthalmology Medicine-Ophthalmology
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: The Turkish Journal of Ophthalmology (TJO) is the only scientific periodical publication of the Turkish Ophthalmological Association and has been published since January 1929. In its early years, the journal was published in Turkish and French. Although there were temporary interruptions in the publication of the journal due to various challenges, the Turkish Journal of Ophthalmology has been published continually from 1971 to the present. The target audience includes specialists and physicians in training in ophthalmology in all relevant disciplines.
期刊最新文献
Caffeine and Vision: Effects on the Eye. Conjunctival Collagen Cross-Linking for the Treatment of Leaking Avascular Cystic Bleb. Does Laser Iridotomy Cause Secondary Epiretinal Membrane? Effects of Glaucoma Treatment on Ocular Surface and Tear Functions: Comparison of Trabeculectomy and Antiglaucoma Drops. Evaluation of Medically Reversible Limbal Stem Cell Deficiency.
×
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