The aim is to study the use of Ocusweep system especially in driving health evaluation and compare the results produced by Ocusweep system to those of conventional devices. The main focus is in patients suffering from wet age-related macular degeneration. The study aims to find out how frequently these patients do not meet the European Union health criteria of safe driving and how Ocusweep finds these patients from a population of patients being treated in a busy medical retina clinic. The tests of Ocusweep system are compared against conventional visual field tests, contrast sensitivity tests, visual acuity tests and tests showing anatomical changes related to wet age-related macular degeneration (optical coherence tomography, fundus photography and fluorescein or indocyanine green angiography).
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
NA
Purpose
SCREENING
Masking
NONE
Enrollment
600
Comparison of Ocusweep system to conventional visual acuity, contrast sensitivity and visual field testing.
Evidence that Ocusweep finds patients not meeting health criteria for driving, measured by absolute scotoma in central visual field
Time frame: 2 years
Evidence that Ocusweep finds patients not meeting health criteria for driving, measured by narrowing of peripheral visual field
Time frame: 2 years
Evidence that Ocusweep finds patients not meeting health criteria for driving, measured by visual acuity score
Time frame: 2 years
Evidence that Ocusweep finds patients not meeting health criteria for driving, measured by contrast sensitivity score
Time frame: 2 years
Evidence of whether Ocusweep is comparable to conventional methods or not, by comparison of results acquired by central visual field testing
Time frame: 4 years
Evidence of whether Ocusweep is comparable to conventional methods or not, by comparison of results acquired by peripheral visual field testing
Time frame: 4 years
Evidence of whether Ocusweep is comparable to conventional methods or not, by comparison of results in visual acuity scores
Time frame: 4 years
Evidence of whether Ocusweep is comparable to conventional methods or not, by comparison of results in contrast sensitivity score
Time frame: 4 years
Evidence which (Ocusweep or ophthalmologist) is better in finding patients not meeting health criteria for driving, by comparison of results acquired by central visual field testing
Time frame: 2 years
Evidence which (Ocusweep or ophthalmologist) is better in finding patients not meeting health criteria for driving, by comparison of results acquired by peripheral visual field testing
Time frame: 2 years
Evidence which (Ocusweep or ophthalmologist) is better in finding patients not meeting health criteria for driving, by comparison of results in visual acuity scores
Time frame: 2 years
Evidence which (Ocusweep or ophthalmologist) is better in finding patients not meeting health criteria for driving, by comparison of results in contrast sensitivity score
Time frame: 2 years
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.