A New System for Assessing Visual Disability Using a Digital Visor.

digital visor visual disability visual residual coefficient

Journal

Journal of clinical medicine
ISSN: 2077-0383
Titre abrégé: J Clin Med
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101606588

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
11 Apr 2020
Historique:
received: 08 03 2020
revised: 31 03 2020
accepted: 06 04 2020
entrez: 16 4 2020
pubmed: 16 4 2020
medline: 16 4 2020
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Considering the lack of universally accepted visual requirements for driving and for defining various grades of visual disability, the aim of this study is to propose a new method that provides a numerical score resulting from a combined assessment of the visual field and visual acuity loss obtained using a digital technology visor. This study presents a new system for calculating the percentage of visual disability by combining binocular visual acuity and binocular visual field assessments. A new Global Vision Evaluation System digital technology visor uses standardized, reproducible criteria to produce well-defined, numerically expressed test results. Through a specific algorithm, the device produces a numerical value expressing the percentage of visual disability. Eighty-six subjects with various types of visual impairment underwent visual acuity and visual field test examinations carried out employing both traditional methods and the new digital visor. The two methods provided homogeneously similar results regarding the positioning of the subjects on the visual disability scale. The new digital visor seems to be a valid method to ensure that visual disability assessments are more homogeneous and reliable, and that, consequently, the resources available for this purpose are more fairly distributed.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Considering the lack of universally accepted visual requirements for driving and for defining various grades of visual disability, the aim of this study is to propose a new method that provides a numerical score resulting from a combined assessment of the visual field and visual acuity loss obtained using a digital technology visor.
METHODS METHODS
This study presents a new system for calculating the percentage of visual disability by combining binocular visual acuity and binocular visual field assessments. A new Global Vision Evaluation System digital technology visor uses standardized, reproducible criteria to produce well-defined, numerically expressed test results. Through a specific algorithm, the device produces a numerical value expressing the percentage of visual disability.
RESULTS RESULTS
Eighty-six subjects with various types of visual impairment underwent visual acuity and visual field test examinations carried out employing both traditional methods and the new digital visor. The two methods provided homogeneously similar results regarding the positioning of the subjects on the visual disability scale.
CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS
The new digital visor seems to be a valid method to ensure that visual disability assessments are more homogeneous and reliable, and that, consequently, the resources available for this purpose are more fairly distributed.

Identifiants

pubmed: 32290446
pii: jcm9041086
doi: 10.3390/jcm9041086
pmc: PMC7230512
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Références

Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2012 Oct 01;53(11):6763-9
pubmed: 22956614
Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 1988;8(4):363-70
pubmed: 3253626
J Clin Diagn Res. 2015 Nov;9(11):NC01-5
pubmed: 26675120
Hum Factors. 1994 Sep;36(3):476-87
pubmed: 7989052
BMJ Open. 2015 Feb 27;5(2):e006379
pubmed: 25724982
Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2019 Sep;47(7):847-863
pubmed: 31209996
Ophthalmology. 2018 Jan;125(1):15-21
pubmed: 28863943
Ophthalmology. 2018 Aug;125(8):e54-e55
pubmed: 30032798
Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2018 Dec;256(12):2429-2435
pubmed: 30251198
BMJ. 2000 Oct 21;321(7267):990-2
pubmed: 11039964
Arch Ophthalmol. 1983 Mar;101(3):371-5
pubmed: 6830485
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1993 Jan;34(1):120-9
pubmed: 8425819
Appl Ergon. 2017 Nov;65:316-325
pubmed: 28802451
Surv Ophthalmol. 1999 May-Jun;43(6):535-50
pubmed: 10416796
Ophthalmology. 1982 Nov;89(11):1226-34
pubmed: 7155532
Clin Exp Optom. 2016 Sep;99(5):395-401
pubmed: 27156178
J Glaucoma. 2012 Apr-May;21(4):221-7
pubmed: 21467952
Can J Ophthalmol. 2000 Jun;35(4):192-203
pubmed: 10900516

Auteurs

Raffaele Sangiuolo (R)

Italian Foundation of Digital and Robotic Ophthalmology (F.I.O.D.E.R.), 84134 Salerno, Italy.

Filippo Amore (F)

Italian National Centre of Services and Research for the Prevention of Blindness and Rehabilitation of the Visually Impaired-WHOCC, IAPB Italy Onlus-FPG IRCCS, 00168 Roma, Italy.

Mauro Bacci (M)

Legal Medicine, Forensic Sciences, and Sport Medicine Section, University of Perugia, 06100 Perugia, Italy.

Paolo Brusini (P)

Department of Ophthalmology, "Città di Udine" Health Clinic, 33100 Udine, Italy.

Filippo Cruciani (F)

Italian National Centre of Services and Research for the Prevention of Blindness and Rehabilitation of the Visually Impaired-WHOCC, IAPB Italy Onlus-FPG IRCCS, 00168 Roma, Italy.

Giacomo Gualtieri (G)

Department of Medical Sciences, Surgery and Neurosciences, Section of Legal Medicine, Santa Maria alle Scotte University Hospital of Siena, 53100 Siena, Italy.

Massimo Lancia (M)

Legal Medicine, Forensic Sciences, and Sport Medicine Section, University of Perugia, 06100 Perugia, Italy.

Giulia Sangiuolo (G)

Legal Medicine, Forensic Sciences, and Sport Medicine Section, University of Perugia, 06100 Perugia, Italy.

Mario Sangiuolo (M)

Department of Ophthalmology, NHS Latina Pontino Center University of Roma "La Sapienza", 04100 Latina, Italy.

Classifications MeSH