Premium
Habitual binocular performance and vision‐related quality of life
Author(s) -
Patel R.,
Pardhan S.,
Hobbiss A.,
Gilchrist J.
Publication year - 2002
Publication title -
ophthalmic and physiological optics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.147
H-Index - 66
eISSN - 1475-1313
pISSN - 0275-5408
DOI - 10.1046/j.1475-1313.2002.00086_22.x
Subject(s) - binocular vision , monocular , audiology , visual acuity , optometry , medicine , contrast (vision) , psychology , ophthalmology , artificial intelligence , computer science
Purpose: Binocular summation (binocular sensitivity > monocular sensitivity) and binocular inhibition (binocular sensitivity < monocular sensitivity) have been shown in various laboratory and clinical situations. The occurrence of habitual binocular summation/inhibition is unknown. The aim of this study was to investigate binocular performance in 100 ‘ocularly normal’ subjects over the age of 45 years attending an optometric practice. In addition, very little data exist on habitual quality of life (QOL) scores in normal subjects. We aimed to investigate whether binocular performance for different visual tasks affected QOL scores. Methods: Right eye, left eye and binocular contrast sensitivity (CS), near and distance logMAR acuity (VA), and face recognition (FR) were measured. Vision‐related quality of life (QOL) scores were measured using the standard NEI–VFQ 25 questionnaire. Results: Habitual binocular summation ratios were similar to those reported under laboratory conditions. Binocular summation ratios for visual acuity were 26%, 47% for CS and 11% for FR. Binocular inhibition was shown by 12 subjects with VA, seven people in CS and 31 subjects with FR. No significant associations were shown between the summation ratios of distance VA, near VA, CS & FR and the 13 different QOL categories. Conclusions: Face recognition showed the poorest summation as it falls under the complex pattern recognition known to produce lower summation under laboratory conditions. Binocular summation ratios were not significantly associated with either the age of the subject or to the differences between the two eyes. The lack of correlation between binocular summation ratios and QOL was because of the high scores shown by the normal subjects.