Measuring contrast sensitivity under different lighting conditions:: Comparison of three tests
Measuring contrast sensitivity under different lighting conditions:: Comparison of three tests
复制标题
DOI：
10.1097/01.opx.0000216100.93302.2d
复制
发表时间：
2006-05-01
影响因子：
1.4
通讯作者：
Kohnen, Thomas
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Buhren, Jens;Terzi, Evdoxia;Kohnen, Thomas
目的.本研究的目的是评估三种心理物理测试在不同亮度水平下测量对比敏感度（CS）和失能眩光（DG）。在60人的60只眼睛中（第1组：20只年轻人的健康眼睛;第2组：20只老年人的健康眼睛;第3组：核性白内障20眼），用Frankfurt-Freiburg对比度和视力测试系统（FF-CATS）和功能性视力对比度测试两次测量最佳矫正的CS（FACT，1.5个循环/度[cpd]），在167 cd/m（2）和0.167 cd/m（2）下，以及在100 cd/m（2）下，有眩光和无眩光时的Pelli-Robson图表（PRC）。对CS值的重复性和重复性以及不同亚组之间的区分能力进行了评估。最大CS值在各试验中不同。在所有组中，使用明视FF-CATS获得了最高CS值。对于1.5 cpd的FACT评分，年轻受试者存在天花板效应。使用PRC获得的CS评分最低。PRC在所有测试中具有最佳的重测重复性。在有眩光的中间视觉条件下，可靠性通常较低; FF-CATS的中间视觉测试的可重复性最高。FF-CATS最好区分所有条件下的不同组。CS测试方法之间的测试结果存在很大差异，尤其是在不同的光照条件下。不同CS测试的结果不可互换。
Purpose. The purpose of this study was to evaluate three psychophysical tests for the measurement of contrast sensitivity (CS) and disability glare (DG) at different luminance levels.Methods. In 60 eyes of 60 individuals (group 1: 20 healthy eyes of young individuals; group 2: 20 healthy eyes of elderly subjects; group 3: 20 eyes with nuclear cataract), CS with best correction was measured twice with the Frankfurt-Freiburg Contrast and Acuity Test System (FF-CATS) and the Functional Acuity Contrast Test (FACT, 1.5 cycles per degree [cpd]) at 167 cd/m(2) and 0.167 cd/m(2), and with the Pelli-Robson Chart (PRC) at 100 cd/m(2) with and without glare. Repeatability of test and retest, and discriminative ability between the different subgroups, were assessed for CS values.Results. Maximum CS values varied across tests. In all groups, highest CS values were obtained with the photopic FF-CATS. For FACT scores at 1.5 cpd, there was a ceiling effect for young subjects. CS scores obtained with the PRC were the lowest. The PRC had the best test-retest repeatability of all tests. Under mesopic conditions with glare, reliability was generally lower; the FF-CATS had the highest repeatability of the mesopic tests. The FF-CATS discriminated best between the different groups for all conditions.Conclusions. There are large discrepancies in the test results between CS testing methods, especially under different lighting conditions. Results from different CS tests are not interchangeable.