September 2016
Volume 57, Issue 12
Open Access
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   September 2016
Binocular Measures of Visual Function versus Monocular-based Approximations
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • David C Musch
    Ophthalmology & Visual Sciences, Univ of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States
    Epidemiology, Univ of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States
  • Leslie M Niziol
    Ophthalmology & Visual Sciences, Univ of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States
  • Brenda W Gillespie
    Biostatistics, Univ of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships   David Musch, None; Leslie Niziol, None; Brenda Gillespie, None
  • Footnotes
    Support  NIH/NEI Grant EY025719
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science September 2016, Vol.57, 5596. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      David C Musch, Leslie M Niziol, Brenda W Gillespie; Binocular Measures of Visual Function versus Monocular-based Approximations. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2016;57(12):5596.

      Download citation file:

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

  • Supplements

Purpose : To assess the relationship of binocular visual function measures with monocular approximations, using data from the Collaborative Initial Glaucoma Treatment Study (CIGTS).

Methods : 607 subjects with newly diagnosed open-angle glaucoma participated in the CIGTS. Visual field (VF) and visual acuity (VA) measures were taken at baseline and every 6 months thereafter. Binocular tests of visual function (Esterman VF score; binocular VA) were added to the CIGTS protocol 3 years into the study. Among the 7 monocular-based approximations of binocular visual function were better eye, worse eye, average eye, best location, and binocular summation. Associations between binocular test results and monocular approximations to represent binocular visual function were assessed with Pearson’s correlations (r), as was the relationship between quality of life [QOL, by the Visual Activities Questionnaire (VAQ) and the National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire (NEI-VFQ25)] and monocular or binocular visual function.

Results : 575 subjects had at least 1 binocular visual function measure. The Esterman score was significantly correlated with all monocular approximations of binocular MD, with r-values ranging from 0.33 (worse eye MD) to 0.44 (better eye MD, all p<0.0001). Binocular VA showed larger correlations with monocular approximations, with r-values ranging from 0.65 (worse eye VA) to 0.77 (binocular summation, all p<0.0001). Correlations between the VAQ and Esterman score were largest in 7 of 9 subscales (r =-0.14 to -0.25, all p<0.05) than correlations with all 7 monocular approximations. In contrast, correlations between the VAQ and binocular VA (r=-0.07 to -0.21) were smaller in all subscales than those with better eye, average eye, and binocular summation of VA (r=-0.09 to -0.25), but not different from worse eye. These trends were also found in relevant subscales of the NEI-VFQ25.

Conclusions : Correlations between VA measured binocularly and monocular approximations were larger than similar comparisons between VF measured binocularly and monocular approximations. The best monocular approximation of binocular VA was binocular summation, and of binocular VF was the better eye VF. Correlations of VA and VF with the VAQ were modest. Most monocular approximations of binocular VA correlated better with the VAQ than binocular VA. In contrast, binocular VF correlated better with the VAQ than monocular approximations.

This is an abstract that was submitted for the 2016 ARVO Annual Meeting, held in Seattle, Wash., May 1-5, 2016.


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.