Article Text

other Versions

PDF
The SPARCS: a novel assessment of contrast sensitivity and its reliability in patients with corrected refractive error
  1. Yi Sun1,
  2. Elif Erdem1,
  3. Andrew Lyu1,
  4. Camila Zangalli1,
  5. Sheryl S Wizov1,
  6. David Lo1,
  7. Eric E Spaeth2,
  8. Jesse Richman1,
  9. George L Spaeth1
  1. 1Department of Ophthalmology, Glaucoma Research Center, Wills Eye Hospital, Jefferson Medical College, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
  2. 2Department of Glaucoma, Wills Eye Hospital, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
  1. Correspondence to Dr George L Spaeth, Department of Ophthalmology, Glaucoma Research Center, Wills Eye Hospital, 840 Walnut St, Philadelphia PA 19107, USA; gspaeth{at}willseye.org

Abstract

Purpose To explore the reliability of the Spaeth/Richman Contrast Sensitivity (SPARCS) test and to assess the contrast sensitivity (CS) distribution among subjects with various refractive errors.

Methods Cross-sectional study. Ninety-three individuals (182 eyes) with varying amounts of refractive error were included in this study and divided into six groups according to their spherical equivalent. CS was evaluated using Pelli–Robson (PR) and SPARCS assessments. Each eye was tested twice with both measurements. Outcomes included the correlations of PR and SPARCS scores, the test–retest agreement of the two measurements and the limits of agreement between tests of CS measurements. The distribution of CS among the six groups was compared.

Results Pearson correlation analysis showed statistically significant correlations between SPARCS and PR scores (p<0.001). Reliability analysis showed that SPARCS had better test–retest agreement than PR, with SPARCS exhibiting a higher intraclass coefficient (ICC=0.635). Bland–Altman plots showed that the mean difference of measurements was close to 0 for both CS measurements. Among the six refractive groups, there were no significant differences in CS scores with either measurement.

Conclusions SPARCS appears to be a reliable assessment for CS. The difference in CS among myopes, emmetropes and hyperopes wearing their habitual correction was statistically insignificant in this study.

Clinical trial number NCT01300949, post results

  • Diagnostic tests/Investigation
  • Visual perception
  • Imaging

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Linked Articles

  • At a glance
    Keith Barton James Chodosh Jost Jonas