alexa Prospective evaluation of visual acuity assessment: a comparison of snellen versus ETDRS charts in clinical practice (An AOS Thesis).


Optometry: Open Access

Author(s): Kaiser PK

Abstract Share this page

Abstract PURPOSE: THE PURPOSE OF THIS STUDY WAS TWOFOLD: first, to prospectively compare visual acuity (VA) scores obtained with Snellen charts versus Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) charts in a "real world" retinal practice, and second, to see if there was a difference in visual acuity measurements obtained with ETDRS charts starting at 4 or 2 meters. METHODS: Prospective, consecutive evaluation of patients who underwent best-corrected visual acuity testing of their right eye performed at a single seating by the same experienced, certified vision examiner in the same room with standardized low light conditions using a projected Snellen chart at 20 feet, and two different back-illuminated ETDRS charts placed 4 and 2 meters from the patient. RESULTS: One hundred sixty-three eyes were included in the study. The mean Snellen VA was 0.67 logMAR (20/94), ETDRS VA at 4 meters was 0.54 logMAR (~20/69), and ETDRS VA at 2 meters was 0.51 logMAR (~20/65). The mean difference was 6.5 letters better on the ETDRS chart (P=.000000001). As the VA worsened, there was increased variability between the charts and the mean discrepancy between charts also increased. Subgroup analysis revealed the greatest difference between charts was in the poor vision subgroup (<20/200) with a difference of 0.2 logMAR (10 letters; P=.0000002). Patients with exudative age-related macular degeneration (AMD) had the greatest disparity on vision testing, but patients with dry AMD and diabetic retinopathy also exhibited significant differences. CONCLUSIONS: Visual acuity scores were significantly better on ETDRS charts compared to Snellen charts. The difference was greatest with poor visual acuity (<20/200) and in patients with exudative AMD. Thus, caution should be exercised when comparing data using the different charts.
This article was published in Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc and referenced in Optometry: Open Access

Relevant Expert PPTs

Peer Reviewed Journals
Make the best use of Scientific Research and information from our 700 + peer reviewed, Open Access Journals
International Conferences 2017-18
Meet Inspiring Speakers and Experts at our 3000+ Global Annual Meetings

Contact Us

© 2008-2017 OMICS International - Open Access Publisher. Best viewed in Mozilla Firefox | Google Chrome | Above IE 7.0 version