Dataset Information

Visual acuity through Bangerter filters in nonamblyopic eyes.

ABSTRACT: To describe the amount of visual acuity degradation induced by Bangerter filters in the better seeing eye and to evaluate its stability over time in children with moderate amblyopia.Visual acuity with and without a Bangerter filter was measured in the nonamblyopic eye of 186 children with moderate amblyopia who were then treated with either patching or the Bangerter filters. A 0.2 filter was used for amblyopia of 20/80 and a 0.3 filter for amblyopia from 20/40 to 20/63. For the 89 children randomized to Bangerter filters, visual acuity was also measured in the nonamblyopic eye with and without the filters at both 6 weeks and 12 weeks after initiating treatment.Mean degradation in visual acuity of the nonamblyopic eye at baseline was 5.1 logMAR lines with the 0.2 filter and 4.8 logMAR lines with the 0.3 filter. The degradation with each filter did not always agree with the manufacturer's specifications. Over time, the amount of degradation with the filters decreased.The 0.2 and 0.3 Bangerter filters degrade nonamblyopic eye visual acuity sufficiently in amblyopic children. Because the amount of degradation decreases over time, it is recommended to periodically apply a new filter when using this type of amblyopia treatment.

SUBMITTER: Rutstein RP

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3098928 | biostudies-literature | 2011 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Visual acuity through Bangerter filters in nonamblyopic eyes.

Rutstein Robert P RP Foster Nicole C NC Cotter Susan A SA Kraker Raymond T RT Lee Dave H DH Melia Michele M Quinn Graham E GE Tamkins Susanna M SM Wallace David K DK

Journal of AAPOS : the official publication of the American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus 20110321 2

<h4>Purpose</h4>To describe the amount of visual acuity degradation induced by Bangerter filters in the better seeing eye and to evaluate its stability over time in children with moderate amblyopia.<h4>Methods</h4>Visual acuity with and without a Bangerter filter was measured in the nonamblyopic eye of 186 children with moderate amblyopia who were then treated with either patching or the Bangerter filters. A 0.2 filter was used for amblyopia of 20/80 and a 0.3 filter for amblyopia from 20/40 to ...[more]

PMID: 21419678

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo compare visual acuity (VA) scores after autorefraction vs manual refraction in eyes of patients with diabetes mellitus and a wide range of VAs.MethodsThe letter score from the Electronic Visual Acuity (EVA) test from the electronic Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study was measured after autorefraction (AR-EVA score) and after manual refraction (MR-EVA score), which is the research protocol of the Diabetic Retinopathy Clinical Research Network. Testing order was randomized, study participants and VA examiners were masked to refraction source, and a second EVA test using an identical supplemental manual refraction (MR-EVAsuppl score) was performed to determine test-retest variability.ResultsIn 878 eyes of 456 study participants, the median MR-EVA score was 74 (Snellen equivalent, approximately 20/32). The spherical equivalent was often similar for manual refraction and autorefraction (median difference, 0.00; 5th-95th percentile range, -1.75 to 1.13 diopters). However, on average, the MR-EVA scores were slightly better than the AR-EVA scores, across the entire VA range. Furthermore, the variability between the AR-EVA scores and the MR-EVA scores was substantially greater than the test-retest variability of the MR-EVA scores (P < .001). The variability of differences was highly dependent on the autorefractor model.ConclusionsAcross a wide range of VAs at multiple sites using a variety of autorefractors, VA measurements tend to be worse with autorefraction than manual refraction. Differences between individual autorefractor models were identified. However, even among autorefractor models that compare most favorably with manual refraction, VA variability between autorefraction and manual refraction is higher than the test-retest variability of manual refraction. The results suggest that, with current instruments, autorefraction is not an acceptable substitute for manual refraction for most clinical trials with primary outcomes dependent on best-corrected VA.

Dataset Information

Visual acuity through Bangerter filters in nonamblyopic eyes.

Publications

Visual acuity through Bangerter filters in nonamblyopic eyes.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets