Search

Georgios Labiris,1 Eirini-Kanella Panagiotopoulou,1 Erald Duzha,2 Maria Tzinava,2 Asli Perente,1 Aristeidis Konstantinidis,1 Konstantinos Delibasis2 1Department of Ophthalmology, University Hospital of Alexandroupolis, Dragana, 68131, Alexandroupolis, Greece; 2Department of Computer Science and Biomedical Informatics, University of Thessaly, Lamia, 35131, GreeceCorrespondence: Georgios LabirisDepartment of Ophthalmology, University Hospital of Alexandroupolis, Dragana, 68131, Alexandroupolis, GreeceTel +30 697 745 5027Fax +30 255 103 0405Email labiris@usa.netPurpose: To develop and validate a web-based reading test for normal and low vision patients.Methods: This is a prospective, comparative trial. The web-based Democritus Digital Acuity Reading Test (wDDART) was developed. wDDART introduces a series of advanced characteristics (advanced text calibration, computer-vision-based estimation of patient’s distance, and automatic calculation of patient’s reading times) that facilitate the overall examination procedure. wDDART’s reading parameters [reading acuity (RA), maximum reading speed (MRS), critical print size (CPS) and reading accessibility index (ACC)] were compared to the corresponding ones of its conventional Windows-based reading test (DDART) in a sample of normal and low vision participants. wDDART’s test–retest reliability for all reading parameters was evaluated in a 15-day time-window.Results: One hundred patients (normal vision group-NVG: 70; low vision group-LVG: 30 patients) responded to DDART and wDDART. Non-significant differences between the two reading tests were found for all parameters in NVG and LVG. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) between the two tests demonstrated good or excellent correlation for RA, MRS, ACC and moderate correlation for CPS. Test–retest reliability was excellent for RA and ACC, while ICCs were 0.715– 0.895 for MRS and CPS.Conclusion: The wDDART demonstrated sufficient validity and repeatability making it suitable for clinical and research settings.Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT04618224.Keywords: presbyopia, reading speed, critical print size, reading acuity, computer vision distance estimation, automatic reading timing, internet, reading

Purpose: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of switching treatment in eyes with neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) and treatment intervals of ≤6 weeks to brolucizumab. Methods: In this prospective series, eyes with persisting retinal fluid under aflibercept or ranibizumab every 4–6 weeks were switched to brolucizumab. Visual acuity (BCVA), reading acuity (RA), treatment intervals, central subfield thickness (CST), and the presence of intra- and subretinal fluid were recorded over 6 months. Results: Seven of 12 eyes completed the 6 month follow-up and received 4.4 ± 0.5 brolucizumab injections within 28.0 ± 2.8 weeks. Treatment intervals increased from 5.3 ± 0.9 weeks to 9.0 ± 2.8 weeks (95% confidence interval of extension (CI): 1.6 to 5.9). BCVA improved from 67.8 ± 7.2 to 72.2 ± 7.5 (95% CI: −0.3 to 9.1) ETDRS letters, RA improved from 0.48 ± 0.15 to 0.31 ± 0.17 LogRAD (95% CI: 0.03 to 0.25), and CST improved from 422.1 ± 97.3 to 353.6 ± 100.9 µm (95% CI: −19.9 to 157.1). Treatment was terminated early in five eyes (two intraocular inflammations with vascular occlusion without vision loss, one stroke, and two changes in the treatment plan). Conclusions: Improvement in visual performance and longer treatment intervals in our series over 6 months indicate the potential of brolucizumab to reduce the treatment burden in nAMD, while two instances of intraocular inflammation were encountered.

Background MNREAD is an advanced near-vision acuity chart that has already been translated and validated in Greek language. Considering that no validated Greek digital near-vision test exists, our primary objective was to develop and validate a digital near-vision reading test based on the fundamental properties of the Greek printed MNREAD (MNREAD-GR). Methods This is a prospective, comparative study. A digital near-vision chart was developed (Democritus Digital Acuity Reading Test – DDART) with text size calibration, audio recording for automatic reading timing, as well as automatic calculation of reading acuity (RA), maximum reading speed (MRS), critical print size (CPS) and reading accessibility index (ACC). Normal and low vision subjects participated in the validation process, responding to MNREAD-GR and DDART at the same day, at a 40 cm viewing distance. Differences in all parameters between the charts were compared with t-test and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs). Within 15 days, all participants responded again to DDART in a different set of sentences to assess its test-retest reliability. Results One hundred patients (normal vision group - NVG: 70 patients; low vision group - LVG: 30 patients) responded to both reading tests. Non-significant differences were detected for all parameters between DDART and MNREAD-GR except for MRS and ACC that were significantly higher in MNREAD-GR in NVG (p Conclusions The proposed reading test presented comparable validity and repeatability to MNREAD-GR suggesting that it can be used both in normal and low vision Greek patients. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04242836. Registered 24 January 2020 – Retrospectively registered.

Reading is a primary problem for low vision patients and a common functional endpoint for eye disease. However, there is limited agreement on reading assessment methods for clinical outcomes. Many clinical reading tests lack standardized materials for repeated testing and cannot be self-administered, which limit their use for vision rehabilitation monitoring and remote assessment. We compared three different reading assessment methods to address these limitations. Normally sighted participants (N = 12) completed MNREAD, and two forced-choice reading tests at multiple font sizes in counterbalanced order. In a word identification task, participants indicated whether 5-letter pentagrams, syntactically matched to English, were words or non-words. In a true/false reading task, participants indicated whether four-word sentences presented in RSVP were logically true or false. The reading speed vs. print size data from each experiment were fit by an exponential function with parameters for reading acuity, critical print size and maximum reading speed. In all cases, reading speed increased quickly as an exponential function of text size. Reading speed and critical print size significantly differed across tasks, but not reading acuity. Reading speeds were faster for word/non-word and true/false reading tasks, consistent with the elimination of eye movement load in RSVP but required larger text sizes to achieve those faster reading speeds. These different reading tasks quantify distinct aspects of reading behavior and the preferred assessment method may depend on the goal of intervention. Reading performance is an important clinical endpoint and a key quality of life indicator, however, differences across methods complicate direct comparisons across studies.

Purpose: To develop the Persian version of MNREAD acuity charts and test their repeatability in a normal adult population. Methods: Two hundred sentences were constructed using the most frequent words of 8-year-olds schoolbooks. The number of characters and sentence length were adjusted based on the design principles of the Minnesota Low Vision Reading Test. Two Persian language teachers checked the sentences for syntax and meaning. The accepted sentences were read by 20 adults and then by 20 children. Using RADNER charts method, the sentences with inappropriate reading time and repeated errors were excluded. Thirty-eight sentences were approved to create charts. To check the charts' validity and repeatability, 20 adults read both charts and a paragraph of a daily newspaper. Reading acuity, critical print size, and maximum reading speed were calculated. The measured reading speeds were compared to the readers' reading speeds for a paragraph of a daily newspaper. Bland-Altman plots were used to evaluate the agreement between the two charts. Results: Thirty-eight selected sentences were used in the final printed charts. There were significant correlations between maximum reading speed for Charts 1 and 2 (r = 0.87, P < 0.0001), Chart 1 and newspaper paragraph (r = 0.73, P = 0.001), and Chart 2 and newspaper paragraph (r = 0.83, P = 0.0001). Correlations were observed between reading acuities and critical print sizes of two charts (r = 0.72, P < 0.002 and r = 0.77, P = 0.00). The 95% limits of agreement in reading acuity, critical print size, and reading speed between Charts 1 and 2 were ± 0.034 logMAR, ±0.11 logMAR, and ±8.00 words per minute, respectively. Conclusion: The designed Persian MNREAD charts are repeatable and could be used reliably to calculate near acuity, reading speed, and critical print size in Persian-speaking people.

International audience; PURPOSE. Most people with low vision experience difficulty with reading. Reading assessment can provide guidance for prescription of reading aids and strategies for reading rehabilitation. Here we investigate the effectiveness of letter acuity (LA) and reading acuity (RA) as predictors of low-vision reading performance. METHODS. Low-vision subjects (n = 58), young control subjects (n = 52), and older control subjects (n = 14) participated in this study. The low-vision subjects were separated into a Macular group (n = 30) and a Nonmacular group (n = 28) based on whether the diagnoses primarily affected the macular area. LA was measured with the Lighthouse Distance Visual Acuity Chart and RA with the MNREAD Acuity Chart. Reading speeds were obtained across a range of print sizes from the MNREAD test. The MNREAD data were used to estimate required print sizes for three functionally important types of reading for each subject: spot reading (40 words/min [wpm]), fluent reading (80 wpm), and critical print size (required to achieve maximum reading speed). RESULTS. For equal values of LA, the Macular group had significantly worse RA than the Nonmacular group. The differences between vision groups, as well as individual variations within groups, were largely explained by the differences in RA. RA is a better predictor than LA for spot reading size, fluent reading size, and critical print size. CONCLUSIONS. RA may provide more accurate assessment of reading performance than LA for purposes of low-vision reading rehabilitation.

People with Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (ME/CFS) report vision-related reading difficulty, although this has not been demonstrated objectively. Accordingly, we assessed reading speed and acuity, including crowded acuity and acuity for isolated words using standardized tests of reading and vision, in 27 ME/CFS patients and matched controls. We found that the ME/CFS group exhibited slower maximum reading speed, and had poorer crowded acuity than controls. Moreover, crowded acuity was significantly associated with maximum reading speed, indicating that patients who were more susceptible to visual crowding read more slowly. These findings suggest vision-related reading difficulty belongs to a class of measureable symptoms for ME/CFS patients.

A new generation of logarithmic reading charts has sparked interest in standardized reading performance analyses. Such reading charts have been developed according to the standards of the International Council of Ophthalmology. The print size progression in these calibrated charts is in accordance with the mathematical background of EN ISO 8596. These reading charts are: the Bailey-Lovie Word Reading Chart, the Colenbrander English Continuous Text Near Vision Cards, the Oculus Reading Probe II, the MNREAD Charts, the SKread Charts, and the RADNER Reading Charts. The test items used for these reading charts differ among the charts and are standardized to various extents. The Bailey-Lovie Charts, MNREAD Charts, SKread Charts, and RADNER Charts are also meant to measure reading speed and allow determination of further reading parameters such as reading acuity, reading speed based on reading acuity, critical print size, reading score, and logMAR/logRAD ratio. Such calibrated reading charts have already provided valuable insights into the reading performance of patients in many research studies. They are available in many languages and thus facilitate international communication about near visual performance. In the present review article, the backgrounds of these modern reading charts are presented, and their different levels of test-item standardization are discussed. Clinical research studies are mentioned, and a discussion about the immoderately high number of reading acuity notations is included. Using the logReading Acuity Determination ([logRAD] = reading acuity equivalent of logMAR) measure for research purposes would give reading acuity its own identity as a standardized reading parameter in ophthalmology.