The aim of this study is to investigate and compare the validity of four different input methods for Landolt Cs, i.e. the proportion of correct gap positions in relation to the total number of performances. The four input methods are a numeric keypad, an eight-positions rocker switch, a remote control and voice feedback.
The measurement of visual acuity is the most frequent and one of the most important ophthalmological functional investigations. Therefore, it is particularly important to find a measuring procedure with as little input errors as possible. The 8-position Landolt C (LC) is the internationally accepted, well-standardised optotype for the determination of visual acuity. Usually, the subjects informs the examiner verbally about the perceived position of each LC. According to the current literature, about 20 to 30 % of the population suffers from a right/left weakness. Furthermore, language barriers are an additional considerable hurdle. Therefore, it is important to find an input method for the LC gap positions with minimal entry mistakes. In oder to avoid the thresholding procedure and its inherent difficulties, highly supra-threshold (10 times above the previously determined individual central visual acuity threshold) 8-position LCs are presented. The study compares four input methods for entering of the Landolt C gap positions: a modified numeric keypad, an 8-position rocker switch, a modified TV remote control and voice/verbal feedback. Each subject will perform all four input methods, with 2 test runs of 16 Landolt C presentations, each. A forced-choice method will be applied, i.e. the test is not continued until the test person has responded ot each single presentation. Regardless of whether the entry was correct or incorrect, the next Landolt C is displayed. The optotypes are presented using modified version of the Freiburg Visual Acuity and Contrast Test (FrACT), which allows to present the 8-position Landolt Cs in a standardized way on a video display unit (VDU). The sequence of the input methods is randomized. This study is carried out in a "within-subject design", i.e. all test persons go through all test conditions and serve as their own controls.
Study Type
OBSERVATIONAL
Enrollment
24
Four different methods for entering the Landolt C gap position are compared
Ulrich SCHIEFER
Aalen, Deutschland, Germany
validity
Proportion of correct gap position entries in relation to the total number of LC presentations by the four different entry methods
Time frame: Through study completion, an average of 3 months
retest reliability
Comparison of the correct gap position entry between first and second test run by the four different entry methods
Time frame: Through study completion, an average of 3 months
Examination duration
Comparison of the examination duration of the the four different entry methods and by the first and second run
Time frame: Through study completion, an average of 3 months
Subjects´ satisfaction
Subjects´ evaluation (using a questionnaire) for the four different entry methods
Time frame: Through study completion, an average of 3 months
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.