The development of the Melbourne low vision ADL index : a measure of vision disability

PURPOSE. To develop a new test of activities of daily living (ADLs) appropriate for the low-vision population: the Melbourne Low-Vision ADL Index (MLVAI).

METHODS. The MLVAI was designed as a desk-based clinical assessment, comprising 18 observed items on complex ADLs in part (a) and 9 questions on broad self-care ADLs in part (b). Each item was rated on a five-level descriptive scale from 0 to 4, based on independence, speed, and accuracy of performance. It was designed to be administered under standardized conditions with regard to the instructions, illumination, and working distances. The validity and reliability of the new MLVAI was determined for 122 subjects who were representative of the general low-vision population, in a cross-sectional study.

RESULTS. Two items were found to be redundant and were eliminated from the test. Thus, the final test comprised 25 items, with 100 being the highest possible score. Cronbach’s α indicated an internal reliability of 0.96, and an intraclass correlation coefficient indicated an overall reliability of 0.95. The SE of measurement was 4.5. According to Spearman’s correlation coefficient, the test–retest reliability was 0.94 (P < 0.001), and the interpractitioner reliability for five different pairs of practitioners was 0.90 or higher (P < 0.001). With regard to validity, there was a moderately high correlation with vision impairment (r = −0.68, P < 0.001). Using Rasch analysis, content validity was also demonstrated by good separation indexes (4.70 and 9.88) and high reliability scores (0.96 and 0.99) for the person and items parameters, respectively. Separate calculation of indexes and reliability scores for parts (a) and (b) indicated high content validity and reliability of each part. However, the separation indexes and reliability scores were higher for part (a) than for part (b). The correlation coefficient for part (a) and part (b) was 0.68.

CONCLUSIONS. The MLVAI is a highly valid and reliable standardized test of ADL performance for the general low-vision population. It may be used to assess patients with low vision and has the potential to be used as a measure of low-vision rehabilitation outcomes.

Early symptomatic presbyopes - what correction modality works best?

Purpose: To compare the performance of a low-addition silicone hydrogel multifocal soft lens with other soft lens correction options in a group of habitual soft lens wearers of distance correction who are symptomatic of early presbyopia.

Method: This clinical study was designed as a prospective, double-masked, randomized, crossover, dispensing trial consisting of four 1-week phases, one for each of the correction modalities: a low-addition silicone hydrogel multifocal soft lens, monovision, habitual correction, and optimized distance visual correction. The prescriptions of all modalities were finalized at a single fitting visit, and the lenses were worn according to a randomized schedule. All lenses were made from lotrafilcon B material. A series of objective vision tests were conducted: high- and low-contrast LogMAR under high- and low-room lighting conditions, stereopsis, and critical print size. A number of other data collection methods used were novel: some data were collected under controlled laboratory-based conditions and others under real-world conditions, some of which were completed on a BlackBerry hand-held communication device.

Results: All participants were able to be fit with all four correction modalities. Objective vision tests showed no statistical difference between the lens modalities except in the case of low-contrast near LogMAR acuity under low-lighting levels where monovision (+0.29 ± 0.10) performed better than the multifocal (+0.33 ± 0.11, P=0.027) and the habitual (+0.37 ± 0.12, P<0.001) modalities. Subjective ratings indicated a statistically better performance provided by the multifocal correction compared with monovision, particularly for the vision associated with driving tasks such as driving during the daytime (93.3 ± 8.8 vs. 84.2 ± 23.7, P=0.05), at nighttime (88.8 ± 11.7 vs. 74.9 ± 23.6, P=0.001), any associated haloes or glare (92.0 ± 10.6 vs. 78.0 ± 22.8, P=0.003), and observing road signs (90.1 ± 11.8 vs. 79.4 ± 20.2, P=0.027). Preference for the multifocal compared with monovision was also reported when watching television (95.0 ± 6.4 vs. 82.6 ± 20.1, P=0.001) and when changing focus from distance to near (87.0 ± 13.4 vs. 66.1 ± 32.2, P<0.001).

Conclusions: For this group of early presbyopes, the AIR OPTIX AQUA MULTIFOCAL-Low Add provided a successful option for visual correction, which was supported by the results of subjective ratings, many of which were made during or immediately after performing such activities as reading, using a computer, watching television, and driving. These results suggest that making a prediction of success or not based on consulting room acuity tests alone is probably unwise.

A visual profile of Queensland Indigenous children

PURPOSE: Little is known about the prevalence of refractive error, binocular vision, and other visual conditions in Australian Indigenous children. This is important given the association of these visual conditions with reduced reading performance in the wider population, which may also contribute to the suboptimal reading performance reported in this population. The aim of this study was to develop a visual profile of Queensland Indigenous children. METHODS: Vision testing was performed on 595 primary schoolchildren in Queensland, Australia. Vision parameters measured included visual acuity, refractive error, color vision, nearpoint of convergence, horizontal heterophoria, fusional vergence range, accommodative facility, AC/A ratio, visual motor integration, and rapid automatized naming. Near heterophoria, nearpoint of convergence, and near fusional vergence range were used to classify convergence insufficiency (CI). RESULTS: Although refractive error (Indigenous, 10%; non-Indigenous, 16%; p = 0.04) and strabismus (Indigenous, 0%; non-Indigenous, 3%; p = 0.03) were significantly less common in Indigenous children, CI was twice as prevalent (Indigenous, 10%; non-Indigenous, 5%; p = 0.04). Reduced visual information processing skills were more common in Indigenous children (reduced visual motor integration [Indigenous, 28%; non-Indigenous, 16%; p < 0.01] and slower rapid automatized naming [Indigenous, 67%; non-Indigenous, 59%; p = 0.04]). The prevalence of visual impairment (reduced visual acuity) and color vision deficiency was similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Indigenous children have less refractive error and strabismus than their non-Indigenous peers. However, CI and reduced visual information processing skills were more common in this group. Given that vision screenings primarily target visual acuity assessment and strabismus detection, this is an important finding as many Indigenous children with CI and reduced visual information processing may be missed. Emphasis should be placed on identifying children with CI and reduced visual information processing given the potential effect of these conditions on school performance.

Ultraviolet vision in birds: what is its function?

Although UV vision was first demonstrated in birds in the early 1970s, its function is still unknown. Here we review the evidence for UV vision in birds, discuss the special properties of UV light, lay out in detail hypotheses for the function of UV vision in birds and discuss their plausibility. The main hypotheses are that UV vision functions: (i) in orientation, (ii) in foraging and (iii) in signalling. The first receives support from studies of homing pigeons, but it would be unwise to conclude that orientation is UV's primary function in all birds. It is especially important to test the signalling hypothesis because bird plumage often reflects UV and tests of theories of sexual selection have virtually always assumed that birds perceive plumage ''colours'' as humans do. A priori this assumption is unlikely to be correct, for unlike humans, birds see in the UV, have at least four types of cones and have a system of oil droplets which filters light entering individual cones.

Ultraviolet vision, fluorescence and mate choice in a parrot, the budgerigar Melopsittacus undulatus

As in many parrots, the plumage of the budgerigar Melopsittacus undulatus reflects near-ultraviolet (UVA) wavelengths (300-400 nm) and exhibits UVA-induced fluorescence. However, there have, to our knowledge, been no tests of whether the yellow fluorescence observed under intense UVA illumination has any role in signalling. Four experiments were carried out on wild-type budgerigars, where the presence and absence of UV reflectance and fluorescence were manipulated using filters. Few studies have attempted to separate the contribution of UV reflectance to plumage hue as opposed to brightness or distinguish between a role in sexual as opposed to social preferences. However, our first experiments show that not only do females consistently prefer UV-reflecting males, but also that the observed preferences are due to removal of UV affecting the perceived hue rather than brightness. Furthermore, we found no effect Of the light environment on male response to females, suggesting that the female preferences relate to plumage colour per se. Whilst UV reflectance appears important in heterosexual choice by, females, it has no detectable influence on same-sex association preferences. The results from the second series of experiments suggest that enhancement of the budgerigar's yellow coloration through fluorescence has no effect on male attractiveness. However, the fluorescent plumage may play a role in signalling by virtue of the fact that it absorbs UVA and so increases contrast with nearby UV-reflecting plumage. Our study provides convincing evidence that UV reflectances can play a role in mate choice in non-passerines, but no evidence that the yellow fluorescence observed under UVA illumination is itself important as a signal.

Review of guidelines for children's vision screenings

The aim of children's vision screenings is to detect visual problems that are common in this age category through valid and reliable tests. Nevertheless, the cost effectiveness of paediatric vision screenings, the nature of the tests included in the screening batteries and the ideal screening age has been the cause of much debate in Australia and worldwide. Therefore, the purpose of this review is to report on the current practice of children's vision screenings in Australia and other countries, as well as to evaluate the evidence for and against the provision of such screenings. This was undertaken through a detailed investigation of peer-reviewed publications on this topic. The current review demonstrates that there is no agreed vision screening protocol for children in Australia. This appears to be a result of the lack of strong evidence supporting the benefit of such screenings. While amblyopia, strabismus and, to a lesser extent refractive error, are targeted by many screening programs during pre-school and at school entry, there is less agreement regarding the value of screening for other visual conditions, such as binocular vision disorders, ocular health problems and refractive errors that are less likely to reduce distance visual acuity. In addition, in Australia, little agreement exists in the frequency and coverage of screening programs between states and territories and the screening programs that are offered are ad hoc and poorly documented. Australian children stand to benefit from improved cohesion and communication between jurisdictions and health professionals to enable an equitable provision of validated vision screening services that have the best chance of early detection and intervention for a range of paediatric visual problems.