Skip to main content
Top
Published in: International Ophthalmology 4/2018

01-08-2018 | Original Paper

Comparison of visual acuity measurements via three different methods in preschool children: Lea symbols, crowded Lea symbols, Snellen E chart

Authors: Asli Inal, Osman Bulut Ocak, Ebru Demet Aygit, Ihsan Yilmaz, Berkay Inal, Muhittin Taskapili, Birsen Gokyigit

Published in: International Ophthalmology | Issue 4/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

The aim of this study was to compare three different methods to measure visual acuity (VA) in healthy and amblyopic preschool children: a Snellen E chart (SE), a single Lea symbols (SLS), and a crowded Lea symbols (CLS).

Methods

Seventy-eight eyes of 54 patients (28 females, 26 males) were included in this cross-sectional, comparative study. The control group consisted of 30 healthy cases, and the amblyopic group consisted of 24 patients with amblyopia. Best-corrected VA (BCVA) measurements with SLS, CLS, and SE were compared in control eyes (CE), amblyopic eyes (AE), and fellow eyes (FE) separately.

Results

The mean age of the cohort was 5.7 ± 0.7 years (range 5–7 years). The mean refractive error was +1.02 ± 0.36 D (diopter, spherical equivalent) in CE, +5.59 ± 2.45 D in AE, and +3.96 ± 2.38 D in FE. The median BCVA (logMAR) was (in order of SLS, CLS, and SE) 0.00 [interquartile range (IQR) 0.10], 0.10 (IQR 0.10), 0.00 (IQR 0.10) in CE, 0.25 (IQR 0.33), 0.35 (IQR 0.30), 0.25 (IQR 0.38) in AE, and 0.10 (IQR 0.08), 0.10 (IQR 0.00), 0.10 (IQR 0.10) in FE. There was no statistically significant difference between the three methods in terms of the CE or FE (p > 0.05). In contrast, there was a statistically significant difference in AE (p < 0.05). The mean VA measurement with SLS was higher compared with CLS in AE. A positive and strong correlation between the three charts was found in all of the groups (p < 0.001).

Conclusion

We found SLS, CLS, and SE to be consistent: all three methods can be used to obtain measurements of VA in healthy and amblyopic preschool children.
Literature
2.
go back to reference Sanker N, Dhirani S, Bhakat P (2013) Comparison of visual acuity results in preschool children with Lea symbols and Bailey–Lovie E chart. Middle East Afr J Ophthalmol 20:345–348CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Sanker N, Dhirani S, Bhakat P (2013) Comparison of visual acuity results in preschool children with Lea symbols and Bailey–Lovie E chart. Middle East Afr J Ophthalmol 20:345–348CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
3.
go back to reference Mocan MC, Covarrubias MN, Wright KW (2005) Comparison of visual acuity levels in pediatric patients with amblyopia using Wright figures, Allen optotypes, and Snellen letters. JAAPOS 9:48–52 Mocan MC, Covarrubias MN, Wright KW (2005) Comparison of visual acuity levels in pediatric patients with amblyopia using Wright figures, Allen optotypes, and Snellen letters. JAAPOS 9:48–52
4.
go back to reference Committee on Practise and Ambulatory Medicine (1996) Section on ophthalmology. Eye examination and vision screening in infants, children, and young adults. Pediatrics 98:153–157 Committee on Practise and Ambulatory Medicine (1996) Section on ophthalmology. Eye examination and vision screening in infants, children, and young adults. Pediatrics 98:153–157
5.
go back to reference Candy TR, Mihoulam SR, Nosofsky RM, Dobson V (2011) Adult discrimination performance for pediatric acuity test optotypes. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 52:4307–4313CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Candy TR, Mihoulam SR, Nosofsky RM, Dobson V (2011) Adult discrimination performance for pediatric acuity test optotypes. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 52:4307–4313CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
7.
go back to reference Wesemann W, Schiefer U, Bach M (2010) New DIN norms for determination of visual acuity. Ophthalmologe 107:821–826CrossRefPubMed Wesemann W, Schiefer U, Bach M (2010) New DIN norms for determination of visual acuity. Ophthalmologe 107:821–826CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Gregori NZ, Feuer W, Rosenfeld PJ (2010) Novel method for analyzing Snellen visual acuity measurements. Retina 30:1046–1050CrossRefPubMed Gregori NZ, Feuer W, Rosenfeld PJ (2010) Novel method for analyzing Snellen visual acuity measurements. Retina 30:1046–1050CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Faul F, Erdfelder E, Buchner A, Lang AG (2009) Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behav Res Methods 41:1149–1160CrossRefPubMed Faul F, Erdfelder E, Buchner A, Lang AG (2009) Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behav Res Methods 41:1149–1160CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Cyert L, Schmidt P, Maguire M, Moore B, Dobson V, Quinn G, Vision in Preschoolers (VIP) Study Group (2003) Threshold visual acuity testing of preschool children using the crowded HOTV and Lea symbols acuity tests. J AAPOS 7:396–399CrossRefPubMed Cyert L, Schmidt P, Maguire M, Moore B, Dobson V, Quinn G, Vision in Preschoolers (VIP) Study Group (2003) Threshold visual acuity testing of preschool children using the crowded HOTV and Lea symbols acuity tests. J AAPOS 7:396–399CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Gräf M, Becker R, Kaufmann H (2000) Lea symbols: visual acuity assessment and detection of amblyopia. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 238:53–58CrossRefPubMed Gräf M, Becker R, Kaufmann H (2000) Lea symbols: visual acuity assessment and detection of amblyopia. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 238:53–58CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Lorenz B, Brodsky MC (2010) Pediatric ophthalmology, neuroophthalmology, genetics, 1st edn. Springer, HeidelbergCrossRef Lorenz B, Brodsky MC (2010) Pediatric ophthalmology, neuroophthalmology, genetics, 1st edn. Springer, HeidelbergCrossRef
13.
go back to reference Dobson V, Clifford-Donaldson CE, Miller JM, Garvey KA, Harvey EM (2009) A comparison of Lea symbols versus ETDRS letter distance visual acuity in a population of young children with a high prevalence of astigmatism. J AAPOS 13:253–257CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Dobson V, Clifford-Donaldson CE, Miller JM, Garvey KA, Harvey EM (2009) A comparison of Lea symbols versus ETDRS letter distance visual acuity in a population of young children with a high prevalence of astigmatism. J AAPOS 13:253–257CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
14.
go back to reference Ferris FL, Kassoff A, Bresnick GH, Bailey I (1982) New visual acuity charts for clinical research. Am J Ophthalmol 94:91–96CrossRefPubMed Ferris FL, Kassoff A, Bresnick GH, Bailey I (1982) New visual acuity charts for clinical research. Am J Ophthalmol 94:91–96CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference Committee on Vision (1980) Recommended standard procedures for the clinical measurement and specification of visual acuity. Adv Ophthalmol 41:103–148 Committee on Vision (1980) Recommended standard procedures for the clinical measurement and specification of visual acuity. Adv Ophthalmol 41:103–148
16.
go back to reference Liu L, Wang K, Liao B, Xu L, Han S (2004) Perceptual salience of global structures and the crowding effect in amblyopia. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 242:566–570CrossRefPubMed Liu L, Wang K, Liao B, Xu L, Han S (2004) Perceptual salience of global structures and the crowding effect in amblyopia. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 242:566–570CrossRefPubMed
17.
go back to reference Lalor SJ, Formankiewicz MA, Waugh SJ (2016) Crowding and visual acuity in adults using paediatric test letters, pictures and symbols. Vision Res 121:31–38CrossRefPubMed Lalor SJ, Formankiewicz MA, Waugh SJ (2016) Crowding and visual acuity in adults using paediatric test letters, pictures and symbols. Vision Res 121:31–38CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Comparison of visual acuity measurements via three different methods in preschool children: Lea symbols, crowded Lea symbols, Snellen E chart
Authors
Asli Inal
Osman Bulut Ocak
Ebru Demet Aygit
Ihsan Yilmaz
Berkay Inal
Muhittin Taskapili
Birsen Gokyigit
Publication date
01-08-2018
Publisher
Springer Netherlands
Published in
International Ophthalmology / Issue 4/2018
Print ISSN: 0165-5701
Electronic ISSN: 1573-2630
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10792-017-0596-1

Other articles of this Issue 4/2018

International Ophthalmology 4/2018 Go to the issue