Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Development and testing of an automated computer tablet-based method for self-testing of high and low contrast near visual acuity in ophthalmic patients

  • Basic Science
  • Published:
Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Many eye diseases require on-going assessment for optimal management, creating an ever-increasing burden on patients and hospitals that could potentially be reduced through home vision monitoring. However, there is limited evidence for the utility of current applications and devices for this. To address this, we present a new automated, computer tablet-based method for self-testing near visual acuity (VA) for both high and low contrast targets. We report on its reliability and agreement with gold standard measures.

Methods

The Mobile Assessment of Vision by intERactIve Computer (MAVERIC) system consists of a calibrated computer tablet housed in a bespoke viewing chamber. Purpose-built software automatically elicits touch-screen responses from subjects to measure their near VA for either low or high contrast acuity. Near high contrast acuity was measured using both the MAVERIC system and a near Landolt C chart in one eye for 81 patients and low contrast acuity using the MAVERIC system and a 25 % contrast near EDTRS chart in one eye of a separate 95 patients. The MAVERIC near acuity was also retested after 20 min to evaluate repeatability.

Results

Repeatability of both high and low contrast MAVERIC acuity measures, and their agreement with the chart tests, was assessed using the Bland-Altman comparison method. One hundred and seventy-three patients (96 %) completed the self- testing MAVERIC system without formal assistance. The resulting MAVERIC vision demonstrated good repeatability and good agreement with the gold-standard near chart measures.

Conclusions

This study demonstrates the potential utility of the MAVERIC system for patients with ophthalmic disease to self-test their high and low contrast VA. The technique has a high degree of reliability and agreement with gold standard chart based measurements.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Gibson JM (2014) 25th RCOphth congress, President's session paper: 25 years of progress in medical retina. Eye. doi:10.1038/eye.2014.141

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Liu L, Wang YZ, Bedell HE (2014) Visual-function tests for self-monitoring of age-related macular degeneration. Optom Vis Sci 91(8):956–965. doi:10.1097/OPX.0000000000000324

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Schmidt-Erfurth U, Chong V, Loewenstein A, Larsen M, Souied E, Schlingemann R, Eldem B, Mones J, Richard G, Bandello F (2014) Guidelines for the management of neovascular age-related macular degeneration by the European Society of Retina Specialists (EURETINA). Br J Ophthalmol 98(9):1144–1167. doi:10.1136/bjophthalmol-2014-305702

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Crossman ER, Goodeve PJ, Marg E (1970) A computer-based automatic method for determining visual acuity. Am J Optom Arch Am Acad Optom 47(5):344–355

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Moke PS, Turpin AH, Beck RW, Holmes JM, Repka MX, Birch EE, Hertle RW, Kraker RT, Miller JM, Johnson CA (2001) Computerized method of visual acuity testing: adaptation of the amblyopia treatment study visual acuity testing protocol. Am J Ophthalmol 132(6):903–909

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Beck RW, Moke PS, Turpin AH, Ferris FL 3rd, SanGiovanni JP, Johnson CA, Birch EE, Chandler DL, Cox TA, Blair RC, Kraker RT (2003) A computerized method of visual acuity testing: adaptation of the early treatment of diabetic retinopathy study testing protocol. Am J Ophthalmol 135(2):194–205

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Ruamviboonsuk P, Sudsakorn N, Somkijrungroj T, Engkagul C, Tiensuwan M (2012) Reliability of visual acuity measurements taken with a notebook and a tablet computer in participants who were illiterate to Roman characters. J Med Assoc Thail = Chotmaihet thangphaet 95(3):S109–S116

    Google Scholar 

  8. Ruamviboonsuk P, Tiensuwan M, Kunawut C, Masayaanon P (2003) Repeatability of an automated Landolt C test, compared with the early treatment of diabetic retinopathy study (ETDRS) chart testing. Am J Ophthalmol 136(4):662–669

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Chew EY, Clemons TE, Bressler SB, Elman MJ, Danis RP, Domalpally A, Heier JS, Kim JE, Garfinkel RA, Appendix 1 for AHSRG (2014) Randomized trial of the ForeseeHome monitoring device for early detection of neovascular age-related macular degeneration. The HOme Monitoring of the Eye (HOME) study design - HOME Study report number 1. Contemp Clin Trials 37(2):294–300. doi:10.1016/j.cct.2014.02.003

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Black JM, Jacobs RJ, Phillips G, Chen L, Tan E, Tran A, Thompson B (2013) An assessment of the iPad as a testing platform for distance visual acuity in adults. BMJ open 3(6), e002730. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2013-002730

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Gounder AC, Colley E, Hille S, Hille DM (2014) Validation of a portable electronic visual acuity system. Journal of Mobile Technology in Medicine 3(2):35–39

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Zhang ZT, Zhang SC, Huang XG, Liang LY (2013) A pilot trial of the iPad tablet computer as a portable device for visual acuity testing. J Telemed Telecare 19(1):55–59. doi:10.1177/1357633X12474964

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Livingstone IAT, Lok ASL, Tarbert C (2014) New mobile technologies and visual acuity. In: Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society (EMBC), 2014 36th Annual International Conference of the IEEE, 26–30. pp 2189–2192. doi:10.1109/EMBC.2014.6944052

  14. Tarbert CM, Livingstone IAT, Weir AJ (2014) Assessment of visual impairment in stroke survivors. In: Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society (EMBC), 2014 36th Annual International Conference of the IEEE, 26–30. pp 2185–2188. doi:10.1109/EMBC.2014.6944051

  15. Aslam TM, Murray IJ, Lai MY, Linton E, Tahir HJ, Parry NR (2013) An assessment of a modern touch-screen tablet computer with reference to core physical characteristics necessary for clinical vision testing. J R Soc Interface 10(84), 20130239. doi:10.1098/rsif.2013.0239

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Tahir HJ, Murray IJ, Parry NR, Aslam TM (2014) Optimisation and assessment of three modern touch screen tablet computers for clinical vision testing. PLoS One 9(4), e95074. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0095074

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Wang YZ, He YG, Mitzel G, Zhang S, Bartlett M (2013) Handheld shape discrimination hyperacuity test on a mobile device for remote monitoring of visual function in maculopathy. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 54(8):5497–5505. doi:10.1167/iovs.13-12037

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Aslam TM, Rahman W, Henson D, Khaw PT (2011) A novel paediatric game-based visual-fields assessor. Br J Ophthalmol 95(7):921–924. doi:10.1136/bjo.2010.198135

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Bland JM, Altman DG (1986) Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1(8476):307–310

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Patton N, Aslam T, Murray G (2006) Statistical strategies to assess reliability in ophthalmology. Eye 20(7):749–754. doi:10.1038/sj.eye.6702097

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Aslam T, Mahmood S, Balaskas K, Patton N, Tanawade RG, Tan SZ, Roberts SA, Parkes J, Bishop PN (2014) Repeatability of visual function measures in age-related macular degeneration. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie 252(2):201–206. doi:10.1007/s00417-013-2421-5

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Kaiser PK (2009) Prospective evaluation of visual acuity assessment: a comparison of snellen versus ETDRS charts in clinical practice (An AOS Thesis). Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc 107:311–324

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Reading VM, Weale RA (1993) Self-administered automatic sight-testing. A feasibility study. Documenta ophthalmologica. Adv Ophthalmol 83(1):43–54

    CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Medical and Human Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK

    Tariq M. Aslam, Caterina Dal Col & Naznin Mirza

  2. Vision Science Centre, Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester Royal Eye Hospital, Central Manchester University, Manchester, UK

    Tariq M. Aslam, Neil R. A. Parry & Ian J. Murray

  3. Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh, UK

    Tariq M. Aslam

  4. Centre for Hearing and Vision Research, Institute of Human Development, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK

    Neil R. A. Parry & Mahani Salleh

  5. Faculty of Life Sciences, University of Manchester, Room 3.005, Carys Bannister Building, Dover Street, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK

    Ian J. Murray & Humza J. Tahir

  6. Department of Biostatistics, Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, Department of Eye and Vision Science, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK

    Gabriela Czanner

Authors
  1. Tariq M. Aslam
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Neil R. A. Parry
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ian J. Murray
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Mahani Salleh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Caterina Dal Col
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Naznin Mirza
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Gabriela Czanner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Humza J. Tahir
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Humza J. Tahir.

Ethics declarations

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Funding

TMA and NRAP’s participation was facilitated by the Manchester Biomedical Research Centre and the Greater Manchester Comprehensive Local Research Network. The study was funded by a research grant from Central Manchester Foundation Trust. The sponsor had no role in the design or conduct of this research.

Conflict of interest

All authors certify that they have no affiliations with or involvement in any organization or entity with any financial interest (such as honoraria; educational grants; participation in speakers' bureaus; membership, employment, consultancies, stock ownership, or other equity interest; and expert testimony or patent-licensing arrangements), or non-financial interest (such as personal or professional relationships, affiliations, knowledge or beliefs) in the subject matter or materials discussed in this manuscript.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Aslam, T.M., Parry, N.R.A., Murray, I.J. et al. Development and testing of an automated computer tablet-based method for self-testing of high and low contrast near visual acuity in ophthalmic patients. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 254, 891–899 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-016-3293-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-016-3293-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation