May 2005
Volume 46, Issue 13
Free
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   May 2005
Associations Between Subjective and Ovjective Visual Function in Patients With Uniocular Macular Hole
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • E. Monestam
    Dept Clin Sci & Ophthalmology, Umea University, Umea, Sweden
  • M. Andersson
    Dept Clin Sci & Ophthalmology, Umea University, Umea, Sweden
  • S. Åström
    Dept Clin Sci & Ophthalmology, Umea University, Umea, Sweden
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships  E. Monestam, None; M. Andersson, None; S. Åström, None.
  • Footnotes
    Support  KMA Crown Princess Margaretha's foundation for vision research
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science May 2005, Vol.46, 1910. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      E. Monestam, M. Andersson, S. Åström; Associations Between Subjective and Ovjective Visual Function in Patients With Uniocular Macular Hole . Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2005;46(13):1910.

      Download citation file:


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

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Abstract: : Purpose: To assess relationships between objective tests of visual function and perceived visual ability recorded with a visual functional questionnaire, in patients with uniocular macular hole. Methods: Forty–seven patients with unilateral macular hole and no other ocular comorbidity were studied. Self–assessed visual ability was measured by a visual function questionnaire (VF–14 with additional questions). High contrast visual acuity (VA) as well as low contrast acuity (LCVA,10% and 2.5%) were measured for both eyes separately and binocularly. Fovea threshold test was measured for both eyes using a Humphrey perimeter. Correlation statistics adjusted for age and gender were used . Results: After controlling for age and gender, the VF–14 score was significantly associated with VA and foveal threshold test of the affected eye, rs=0.–047; p=0.005). (rs=0.38; p=0.03) Regarding the fellow, healthy eye with normal VA, only LCVA 2.5% was significantly associated with the VF–14 score (rs=–0.19; p=0.028). As expected, the healthy, fellow eye had a statistically significant correlation between VA, LCVA 10% and LCVA 2.5% (rs=0.65; p=0.000) (rs=0.48; p=0.004) (rs=0.57; p=0.000), respectively. Regarding fovea threshold test, there was a significant correlation for LCVA 10% and 2.5%, rs=0.57; p=0.000, and rs=0.48; p=0.004, respectively, not for VA. Regarding the eye affected with a macular hole the pattern was different. VA was significantly correlated with fovea threshold test (rs=–0.67; p=0.000) but not with low contrast VA. Low contrast VA 10% and 2.5% were significantly correlated (rs=0.71; p=0.000). Surprisingly, there was a statistically significant correlation between VA of the affected eye and LCVA 2.5% of the fellow eye (rs=0.49; p=0.03) Conclusions: Visual acuity of the affected eye and low contrast VA 2.5% of the healthy eye had the strongest association with subjective visual function in patients with uniocular macular hole. These findings differ from data from cataract patients, which show the VA of the better eye to have a stronger association with subjective visual function than VA of the worse eye. VA of the affected eye was associated with LCVA 2.5% of the fellow eye which could be an indication of subclinical dysfunction of the macula of the fellow eye.

Keywords: macular holes • quality of life • contrast sensitivity 
×
×

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.

×