Historical Overview of Ways to Notate Visual Acuity Data

Chedly Mehdi
Postgraduate¹

Golovchenko A. V.
Postgraduate¹

Siplivy V. I.
MD, PhD, Assistant Professor, Chair for Eye Diseases¹

1 - I. M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University, Moscow, Russia

Chedly Mehdi e-mail: Chedly.mehdi91@gmail.com

None declared.

The study had no sponsorship.

A brief historical overview of visual acuity measurement methods is presented. The main methods of visual acuity data notation, formulas for translating data from one notation to another are analyzed. The problem of non-linearity of these transformations is highlighted, prohibiting direct comparison of similar studies, in case the statistical analysis was carried out in different notations. Decimal notation is traditionally used in the Russian school of ophthalmology, while logarithmic notation prevail in most of English-language publications. This fact prevents an adequate comparison of results in Russian and foreign studies.

visual acuity, ETDRS, decimal scale, logarithmic scale

10.29234/2308-9113-2021-9-1-69-78

1. August C. The Historical Evolution of Visual Acuity Measurement. Visual Impairment Research 2009; 10(2-3): 57-66. doi: 10.1080/13882350802632401

2. Runge P.E. Eduard Jaeger’s Test-Types (Schrift-Scalen) and the Historical Development of Vision Tests, Trans Am Ophth Soc. 2000; 98: 375-438.

3. Bailey I.L., Lovie-Kitchin J.E. Visual acuity testing. From the laboratory to the clinic. Vision Research 2013; 90: 2-9. doi: 10.1016/j.visres.2013.05.004

4. Chaplin P.K., Bradford G.E. A historical review of distance vision screening eye charts: what to toss, what to keep, and what to replace. NASN School Nurse 2011; 26(4): 221-228. doi: 10.1177/1942602X11411094

5. Gracheva M.A., Kazakova A.A., Pokrovskiy D.F., Medvedev I.B. Tablicy dlja ocenki ostroty zrenija: analiticheskij obzor, osnovnye terminy [Visual Acuity Charts: Analytical Review, Basic Terms]. Vestnik Rossijskoj akademii medicinskih nauk [Annals of the Russian academy of medical sciences] 2019; 74(3): 192-199. doi: 10.15690/vramn1142 (In Russ.)

6. Green J. On a new series of test-letters for determining the acuteness of vision. Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc. 1868; 1(4-5): 68-71.

7. Aliev D.A., Nurudinov M.M., Alieva M.A. Jevoljucija metodov issledovanija ostroty zrenija [The evolution of visual acuity test methods]. The EYE GLAZ [The EYE EYE] 2019; 21(4): 7-14. doi: 10.33791/2222-4408-2019-4-7-14 (In Russ.)

8. Monoyer F. Echelle typographique decimale pour mesurer l'acuité visuelle. Gaz. Med. Paris 1875; 21: 258.

9. Grimm W., Rassow B., Wesemann W., Saur K., et al. Correlation of optotypes with the Landolt ring – a fresh look at the comparability of optotypes. Optometry and Vision Science 1994; 71(1): 6-13. doi: 10.1097/00006324-199401000-00002

10. Golovin S.S., Sivtsev D.A. Shrifty dlja izmerenija zrenija na blizkom rasstojanii [Fonts for measuring vision at close range] Moscow: 1928. (In Russ.)

11. Holina A. Novaja tablica dlja issledovanija ostroty zrenija [A new chart for visual acuity assessment]. Russkij oftal'mologicheskij zhurnal [Russian Ophthalmological Journal] 1930; 11(1): 42–47. (In Russ.)

12. Ogle K.N. On the problem of an international nomenclature for designating visual acuity. Am J Ophthalmol. 1953; 36(7): 909−921. doi: 10.1016/0002-9394(53)92172-2

13. Sloan L.L., New test charts for the measurement of visual acuity at far and near distances. Am J Ophthalmol. 1959; 48: 807-813. doi: 10.1016/0002-9394(59)90626-9

14. Bailey I.L., Lovie-Kitchin J.E. New design principles for Visual Acuity Letter Charts. American Journal of Optometry and Physiological Optics 1976; 53(11): 740-745. doi: 10.1097/00006324-197611000-00006

15. ISO 8596. International Standard. Ophthalmic optics. Visual acuity testing. Standard optotype and its presentation. Geneve: International Standards Organization, 1994.

16. ISO 8597. International Standard. Optics and optical instruments. Visual acuity testing. Method of correlating optotypes. Geneve: International Standards Organization, 1994.

17. Plainis S., Tzatzala P., Orphanos Y., Tsilimbaris M.K. A Modified ETDRS Visual Acuity Chart for European-Wide Use. Optometry and Vision Science 2007; 84(7): 647-653. doi: 10.1097/OPX.0b013e3180dc9a60

18. Fomina O.V., Malyugin V.E., Morozova T.A. Standartizacija klinicheskih issledovanij ostroty zrenija posle implantacii mul'tifokal'noj intraokuljarnoj linzy [Standardization of clinical studies of visual acuity after implantation of a multifocal intraocular lens]. Sovremennye tehnologii v oftal'mologii [Modern technologies in ophthalmology] 2015; 3: 169-173. (In Russ.)

19. Holladay J.T. Proper method for calculating average visual acuity. J Refract Surg. 1997; 13(4): 388-391. doi: 10.3928/1081-597X19970701-16

20. Elliott D.B. The good (logMAR), the bad (Snellen) and the ugly (BCVA, number of letters read) of visual acuity measurement. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 2016; 36(4): 355-358. doi: 10.1111/opo.12310

21. Wild J.M, Hussey M.K. Some statistical concepts in the analysis of vision and visual acuity. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 1985; 5(1): 63-71. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-1313.1985.tb00637.x

22. Hussain B., Saleh G.M., Sivaprasad S., Hammond C.J. Changing from Snellen to LogMAR: debate or delay? Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology 2006; 34(1): 6-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1442-9071.2006.01135.x

23. Lovie-Kitchin J.E. Is it time to confine Snellen charts to the annals of history? Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics 2015; 35(6):631-636. doi: 10.1111/opo.12252

24. Khoshnood B., Mesbah M., Jeanbat V., Lafuma A., et al. Transforming scales of measurement of visual acuity at the group level. Ophthal Physiol Opt. 2010; 30: 816-823. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-1313.2010.00766.x