June 2017
Volume 58, Issue 8
Open Access
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   June 2017
Comparing Monocular and Binocular Performance on Chart Tests of Acuity, Contrast Sensitivity and Reading in Normal Subjects
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Benjamin Stephens
    Ophthalmology, West Virginia University, Morgantown, West Virginia, United States
  • J Vernon Odom
    Ophthalmology, West Virginia University, Morgantown, West Virginia, United States
  • Monique J Leys
    Ophthalmology, West Virginia University, Morgantown, West Virginia, United States
  • John Nguyen
    Ophthalmology, West Virginia University, Morgantown, West Virginia, United States
  • Christopher Antonini
    Ophthalmology, West Virginia University, Morgantown, West Virginia, United States
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships   Benjamin Stephens, None; J Vernon Odom, None; Monique Leys, None; John Nguyen, None; Christopher Antonini, None
  • Footnotes
    Support  None
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science June 2017, Vol.58, 4232. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Benjamin Stephens, J Vernon Odom, Monique J Leys, John Nguyen, Christopher Antonini; Comparing Monocular and Binocular Performance on Chart Tests of Acuity, Contrast Sensitivity and Reading in Normal Subjects. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2017;58(8):4232.

      Download citation file:


      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Purpose : To compare monocular and binocular performance of normal subjects on near chart measures of basic visual function and reading (speed and acuity) as a preliminary study comparing functions in visually impaired patients.

Methods : Subjects were patients or employees at the West Virginia University Eye Institute with near acuity of 20/25 or better in each eye (logMAR < 0.1). Their average age was 36 years. Eight of the 20 were male and 12 female. We assessed each subject’s performance on 5 vision chart tests, ETDRS, Pelli-Robson (Precision Vision), Smith-Kettlewell Low Luminance Acuity (SKLL), and MN Read. Subjects were tested on each test monocularly and binocularly at a distance of 16 inches (40 cm). Subjects’ stereopsis was tested using the Titmus Test. Testing was performed in a well lit room (252 lux). ETDRS and MN Read charts were black type on white backgrounds (contrast > 0.9). Binocular summation was evaluated by comparing binocular values to the mean monocular value or to the best monocular value.

Results : Best monocular acuity was the best predictor of reading acuity (p<0.0005, r2=0.497) and reading speed (p<0.0005, r2=0.49). Statistically significant binocular summation (p<0.008) was observed for all tests except reading speed. However, binocular summation was considerably less that the theoretical value of 1.4 (log 0.15). For comparisons to the average monocular acuity the binocular advantage averaged -0.068 and compared to the best monocular acuity -0.035. When binocular reading speed was compared to the average monocular speed there was a gain of only 1.6 words/min (p=0.696). However, the faster monocular speed was 11.643 words/min greater than binocular reading speed (p=0.005).

Conclusions : In our sample, binocular summation did not approach the theoretical and often observed square-root of 2 for acuity or contrast sensitivity. The present results are consistent with prior reports that the best monocular acuity can serve as a good surrogate for binocular acuity and with reports that reading speed in subjects with normal vision shows little if any binocular advantage. In fact, we observed that binocular speed was less than the fastest monocular speed.

This is an abstract that was submitted for the 2017 ARVO Annual Meeting, held in Baltimore, MD, May 7-11, 2017.

×
×

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.

×