Skip to content

A comparison of widely used clinical contrast sensitivity tests: the relation between defocus specific contrast sensitivity and higher order aberrations.

A comparison of widely used clinical contrast sensitivity tests: the relation between defocus specific contrast sensitivity and higher order aberrations.

Status
Active, not recruiting
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Interventional
Source
NL-OMON
Registry ID
NL-OMON20124
Enrollment
48
Registered
2006-11-17
Start date
2005-07-01
Completion date
Unknown
Last updated
2024-02-28

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Measurements in 48 healthy subjects aged 20 to 35 years (24 subjects) and 55 to 70 years (24 subjects).

Interventions

Best corrected visual acuity was determined with an ETDRS chart and the spherical aberration (SA) was measured with a wavefront analyzer (WASCA version 1.26.3, Asclepion Meditec, Jena, Germany). The
Von Bekesy tracking method)
2. The Holladay sine-wave (1.5 -18 cpd) modulated circular lines (HACSS) (M&S Technologies, Skokie, Illinois, USA), and with six contrast sensitivity chart tests: 1. Pelli Robson contrast sensitivit
2. low contrast ETDRS-like optotype chart 2.5%
3. Low contrast ETDRS-like optotype chart 10%
4. Edge contrast sensitivity test: GECKO
5. Edge contrast sensitivity test: GECKO-100
6. Vector Vision. Contrast sensitivity is measured in mesopic (3 cd/m2) and photopic (160 cd/m2) conditions, using only the dominant eye. Tests were performed at optimal refractive state of the eye

Sponsors

University Hospital Groningen, department ophtalmology Hanzeplein 1 Postbus 30.001 9700 RB Groningen The Netherlands Tel: (+31)050-3612510 Fax: (+31)050-3611709 AMO (advanced medical optics) Groningen B.V. Van Swietenlaan 5 9728 NX Groningen Tel: (+31)050-5296600 Fax: (+31)050-5267860
Lead Sponsor

Eligibility

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: No ocular pathology.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: 1. Refractive correction larger than +/- 2 D; 2. Cylindrical correction larger than 1.5 D; 3. Cylindrical axis more then 20º from the horizontal or vertical axis.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
Selection of the contrast sensitivity test which predicts the spherical aberration most reliably.

Secondary

MeasureTime frame
1. Spherical aberration as function of age; 2. RMS as function of age; 3. Contrast sensitivity as function of age; 4. Influence of defocus on contrast sensitivity.

Contacts

Public ContactK.W. Gaalen, van

University Medical Center Groningen (UMCG), Department Ophtalmology, P.O. box 30.001

k.van.gaalen@ohk.umcg.nl+31 (0)50 3619692

Outcome results

None listed

Source: NL-OMON (via WHO ICTRP)