Purchase this article with an account.
Gianfrancesco M. Villani, Giovanni Sato, Donald C. Fletcher, Ronald A. Schuchard, Roberta Rizzo, Carlo Camerucci; Evaluation Of Reading Errors Relative To Microperimetry Findings. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2011;52(14):1904.
Download citation file:
© ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)
To investigate the relationship between microperimetry findings and reading errors on standardized charts in Italian
Multicentric study. 44 eyes of 40 patients with central scotoma(s) were studied. Clinical diagnoses were: AMD (non neovascular and neovascular), myopic maculopathy, macular edema, macular hole, macular pucker, and central serous retinopathy. All patients referred symptoms of blurred vision and subjectively reduced reading ability. Main outcome measures were BCVA (ETDRS at 2 and 1 m), Contrast Sensitivity (Pelli-Robson), reading performance (Italian MN-Read and SK-Read Charts), and location of central scotoma(s) relative to PRL. Microperimetry was performed by means of either a CenterVue MAIA, a Nidek MP-1, or an OPKO OCT-SLO, depending on the study location. Reading rates and errors were recorded, and the latter classified as right or left as they occurred on the side of a word or within it. Missing words were classified as left or right errors relative to their location within a block. When lateral classification did not appear well-defined, the error was marked as "other"
Age median (range) was 75 (38-90), Visual Acuity 20/150 (20/20-20/919), Log Contrast Sensitivity 0.75 (1.35-0). Reading errors median (range) was 2 (0-13) for MN-Read and 10,5 (3-31) for SK-Read, blocks read were 8 (12-1) for MN-Read and 6 (12-1) for SK-Read, and logMAR reading acuity was 0.67 (0.2-1.37) for MN-Read and 0.92 (0.24-1.35) for SK-Read. SK-Read errors (2.5/block) were very significantly more than MN-Read errors (0.8/block). SK-Read showed a trend of errors to the right side of words being related to right sided scotomas and of left sided errors to left sided scotomas, although it did not result statistically significant. Grouping analysis helped differentiate scotoma impact on high and low acuity ranks
SK-Read demonstrated much more sensitive to scotoma induced errors than MN-Read. Verbalization of such a high number of errors through the SK-Read allows a deeper insight into PRL function and scotoma interference on reading. The worse acuity score on SK-Read suggests that reading text without contextual clues (e.g. phone books, technical directories) needs stronger effort and possibly higher magnification for low vision patients to read
This PDF is available to Subscribers Only