A novel computer software for the evaluation of dynamic visual acuity

Abstract Purpose Dynamic visual acuity (DVA) is defined as the ability to discriminate fine details in a moving target. Albeit a growing interest in DVA, there is a lack of standardized, validated instrumentation and procedures for the assessment of this visual function parameter. The aim of the pre...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of optometry 2012-07, Vol.5 (3), p.131-138
Hauptverfasser: Quevedo, Lluïsa, Aznar-Casanova, José Antonio, Merindano-Encina, Dolores, Cardona, Genís, Solé-Fortó, Joan
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Abstract Purpose Dynamic visual acuity (DVA) is defined as the ability to discriminate fine details in a moving target. Albeit a growing interest in DVA, there is a lack of standardized, validated instrumentation and procedures for the assessment of this visual function parameter. The aim of the present study was to analyze qualitative construct validity and test–retest reliability of a novel, computer-assisted instrument (DinVA 3.0) for the measurement of DVA. Methods Two different experiments are presented, involving the participation of 33 subjects. The first experiment aimed at testing qualitative construct validity of the DinVA 3.0 by comparing the outcome of a series of trials consisting in different speeds, contrasts and trajectories of the target stimuli with those reported in the literature. The second experiment assessed test–retest reliability by repeating a series of trials at three different time intervals, at maximum target stimuli contrast and either high or low speed configurations. Results The results of the first experiment gave support to the qualitative construct validity of DinVA 3.0, as the DVA scores were found to be modulated by the speed of the moving target (high speeds yielded lower DVA), contrast (high contrast resulted in better DVA) and trajectory (DVA was better at horizontal rather than oblique trajectories). Test–retest reliability was found to be good, with a small insignificant trend towards improvement with learning. Conclusion The DinVA 3.0 proved to be a valid and reliable instrument for the assessment of DVA and may be considered a promising tool for both clinicians and researchers.
ISSN:1888-4296
1989-1342
DOI:10.1016/j.optom.2012.05.003