EN | TR
E-ISSN: 2147-2661
The Comparison of Scotopic and Mesopic Contrast Sensitivity with Glare between Pseudophakic and Phakic Eyes
PDF
Cite
Share
Request
Original Article
VOLUME: 38 ISSUE: 2
P: 110-115
March 2008

The Comparison of Scotopic and Mesopic Contrast Sensitivity with Glare between Pseudophakic and Phakic Eyes

Turk J Ophthalmol 2008;38(2):110-115
Orkun Müftüoğlu 1
Fatih Karel 2
1.
2.
No information available.
No information available
Received Date: 04.04.2008
Accepted Date: 21.10.2007
PDF
Cite
Share
Request

ABSTRACT

Conclusions:

Scotopic contrast sensitivity and mesopic contrast sensitivity with glare dete-riorates with age both in pseudophakic and phakic eyes. There is no significant difference in scotopic contrast sensitivity and mesopic contrast sensitivity with glare between pseudophakic and phakic eyes.

Results:

There was no statistically significant difference in photopic contrast sensitivity, scotopic contrast sensitivity and mesopic contrast sensitivity with glare between the groups A and B (P>0.05). Scotopic contrast sensitivity and mesopic contrast sensitivity with glare signifi-cantly decreased with age in both pseudophakic and phakic eyes. There was no statistically significant difference in scotopic contrast sensitivity and mesopic contrast sensitivity with glare between pseudophakic and phakic eyes within each age subgroup (P>0.05).

Methods:

Forty-one pseudophakic eyes of 41 patients (group A) with a mean age of 66.1 ± 7.6 years and 41 phakic eyes of 41 age-mathced controls (group B) with a mean age of 64.9 ± 6.6 were included in the study. Fotopic contrast sensitivity was measured under 85 cd/m2 lumi-nance. Skotopic contrast sensitivity was measured under 0.032 ± 0.003 cd/m2 luminance and mesopic contrast sensitivity with glare was measured under 0.10 ± 0.01 cd/m2 luminance. The data was compared between pseudophakic and phakic eyes before and after division of each group into 3 age subgroups (group I: 62 years, group II: 63 - 68 years, Group III: 68 years).

Purpose:

To compare the scotopic contrast sensitivity and mesopic contrast sensitivity with glare of pseudophakic eyes with those of age-matched phakic eyes.

References

1Owsley C. Contrast sensitivity. Ophthalmol Clin North Am 2003;16:171-177.
2 Ginsburg AP. Contrast sensitivity: determining the visual quality and function of cataract, intraocular lenses and refractive surgery. Curr Opin Ophthalmol 2006;17:19-26.
3Logvinenko AD. Does luminance contrast determine lightness? Spat Vis 2005; 18:337-345.
4Amesbury EC, Schallhorn SC. Contrast sensitivity and limits of vision. Int Ophthalmol Clin 2003;43:31-42.
5Puell MC, Palomo C, Sanchez-Ramos C, et al. Mesopic contrast sensitivity in the presence or absence of glare in a large driver population. Graefe's Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2004; 242:755-761.
6Buhren J, Terzi E, Bach M, et al. Measuring contrast sensitivity under different lighting conditions: comparison of three tests. Optom Vis Sci 2006;83:290-298.
7Owsley C, McGwin G. Vision impairment and driving. Surv Ophthalmol 1999;43:535-550.
8Lachenmayr B, Berger J, Buser A, et al. Reduced visual capacity increases the risk of accidents in street traffic. Ophthalmologe 1998; 95:44-50.
9Anderson SJ, Holliday IE. Night driving: effects of glare from vehicle headlights on motion perception. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 1995; 15:545-551.
10Van Rijn LJ, Wilhelm H, Emesz M, et al. Relation between perceived driving disability and scores of vision screening tests. Br J Ophthalmol 2002; 86:1262-1264.
11Black A, Wood J. Vision and falls. Clin Exp Optom 2005; 88:212-222.
12Abdelhafiz AH, Austin CA. Visual factors should be assessed in older people presenting with falls or hip fracture. Age Ageing 2003; 32:26-30.
13Rosenthal BP. Opththalmology. Screening and treatment of age-related and pathologic vision changes. Geriatrics 2001;56:27-31.
14Jackson GR, Owsley C. Scotopic sensitivity during adulthood. Vision Res 2000;40:2467-2473.
15Weale RA. Aging and vision. Vision Res 1986; 26:1507-1512.
16Werner JS. Night vision in the elderly: consequences for seeing through a "blue filtering" intraocular lens. Br J Ophthalmol 2005; 89:1518-1521.
17Mainster MA, Sparrow JR. How much blue light should an IOL transmit? Br J Ophthalmol 2003; 87:1523-1529.
18Packer M, Fine IH, Hoffman RS. Contrast sensitivity and measuring cataract outcomes. Ophthalmol Clin North Am 1006;19:521-533.
19Ernest PH. Light transmission spectrum comparison of foldable intraocular lenses. J Cataract Refract Surg 2004;30:1755-1758.
20Steinmetz RL, Haimovici R, Jubb C, et al. Symptomatic abnormalities of dark adaptation in patients with age-related Bruch's membrane change. Br J Ophthalmol 1993;77:549-554.
21Kamış Ü, Küçükçelik H, Gündüz K, et al. Psödofakiklerde görsel sistemin degerlendirilmesi. Medical Network Oftalmoloji 2002;9:113-118.
22Chylack LT, Wolf e JK, Singer DM. The Lens Opacities Classification System II. The longitudinal study of cataract study group. Arch Ophthalmol 1993;111:831-836.
23Zlatkova MB, Coulter EE, Anderson RS. The effect of simulated lens yellowing and opacification on blue-on-yellow acuity and contrast sensitivity. Vision Res 2006;46:2432-2442.
24Elliot DB, Whitaker D, MacVeigh D. Neural contribution to spatiotemporal contrast sensitivity decline in healthy ageing eyes. Vision Res 1990; 30:541-547.
25Benedek G, Benedek K, Keri S, et al. Human scotopic spatiotemporal sensitivity: a comparison of psychophysical and electrophysiological data. Doc Ophthalmol 2003;106:201-207.
26Schefrin BE, Tregear SJ, Harvey LO, et al. Senescent changes in scotopic contrast sensitivity.V is Res. 1999;39:3728-2736.
27Haegerstrom-Portnoy G, Schneck ME, Brabyn JA. Seeing into old age: vision function beyond acuity. Optom Vis Sci 1999; 76:141-158.
28Rubin GS, Wes t SK, Muoz B, et al. A comprehensive assessment of visual impairment in a population of older Americans. The SEE study. S alisbury eye evaluation project. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1997; 38:557-568.
29Jackson GR, Owsley C, McGwin G Jr. Aging and dark adaptation. Vision Res 1999;39:3975-3982.
30Curcio CA, Millican CL, Allen KA, et al. Aging of the human photoreceptor mosaic: evidence for selective vulnerability of rods in central retina. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1993;34:3278-3296.
31Jackson GR, Owsley C, Curcio CA. Photoreceptor degeneration and dysfunction in aging and age-related maculopathy. Aging Res Rev 2002; 1:381-396.
32Furuskog P, Nilsson BY. Contrast sensitivity in patients with posterior chamber intraocular lens implants. Acta Ophthalmol (Copenh) 1988;66:438-444.
33Knorz MC, Lang A, Hsia TC, et al. Comparison of the optical and visual quality of poly(methyl methacrylate) and silicone intraocular lenses. J Cataract Refract Surg 1993;19:766-771.
34Gözüm N, Ünal ES, Altan-Yaycıoglu R, et al. Visual performance of acrylic and PMMA intraocular lenses. Eye 2003;17:238-242.
35Aslam TM, Haider D, Murray IJ. Principles of disability glare measurement: an ophthalmological perspective. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 2007; 85:354-360.
36Vos JJ. On the cause of disability glare and its dependence on glare angle, age and ocular pigmentation. Clin Exp Optom 2003; 86:363-370.
Article is only available in PDF format. Show PDF
2024 ©️ Galenos Publishing House