Journals / Experimental Biomedical Research / 2022 / Cilt: 5 - Sayı: 3

Relation of contrast sensitivity with binocularity, eye dominance and interpupillary distance in healthy adults

Pages
265–272
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Binocular CS function showed individual differences at high-spatial frequency in healthy adults

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Aim: To investigate the relationship of contrast sensitivity (CS) with binocularity, eye dominance, and interpupillary distance at various spatial frequencies in healthy adults.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Method: Thirty-seven healthy adults (age range, 19-45 years; 27 males) were included.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Binocular CS function showed individual differences at high-spatial frequency in healthy adults
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Özet

Aim: To investigate the relationship of contrast sensitivity (CS) with binocularity, eye dominance, and interpupillary distance at various spatial frequencies in healthy adults. Method: Thirty-seven healthy adults (age range, 19-45 years; 27 males) were included. Binocular and monocular measurements of CS were performed with Automatize ClearChart 2 test on monocular (right and left) and both eyes at low- (1.5 cpd), mid- (6 cpd), and high- (18 cpd) spatial frequencies. Eye dominance was determined with the Hole-in-card test and interpupillary distance was measured with PlusOptics photo scanner, and the results were compared statistically. Results: Eye dominance was identified in 35 (94.59 %) subjects with the right eye being dominant in 23 (65.7%) subjects. The logarithmic CS (logCS) in the dominant eye, non-dominant eye, both eyes were 2.58±0.29, 2.62±0.37, and 2.50±0.00, respectively at 1.5 cpd; 2.54±0.16, 2.50±0.00, and 2.50±0.00, respectively at 6 cpd; and 5.46±2.49, 5.26±2.61, and 3.82±1.82, respectively at 18 cpd. The logCS did not significantly differ between dominant and non-dominant eyes. Binocular logCS was lower than monocular logCS significantly at 18 cpd (p=0.001). The interpupillary distance (mean, 58.78±3.63 mm) was not correlated with binocular logCS. Conclusions: Dominant eye was similar to non-dominant eye in terms of CS function at all frequencies in healthy adults. No functional relationship was detected between interpupillary distance and binocular CS. Binocular CS function showed individual differences at high-spatial frequency in healthy adults

🔖

Cite This Article

BEKDAŞ, M., ÖZTÜRK, H. (2022). Relation of contrast sensitivity with binocularity, eye dominance and interpupillary distance in healthy adults. Experimental Biomedical Research, Cilt: 5 - Sayı: 3, 265–272. https://ajindex.com/articles/418486

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (19)

  1. Ginsburg AP. Contrast sensitivity and functional vision. Int Ophthalmol Clin. 2003
  2. 43(2):5-15. [2]Owsley C. Contrast sensitivity. Ophthalmol Clin North Am. 2003
  3. 16(2):171-77. [3]Amesbury EC, Schallhorn SC. Contrast sensitivity and limits of vision. Int. Ophthalmol Clin. 2003
  4. Xiong YZ, Kwon M, Bittner AK, et al. Relationship between acuity and contrast sensitivity: differences due to eye disease. Invest. Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2020
  5. 61(6): 40. [5]Karatepe AS, Köse S, Eğrilmez S. Factors Affecting Contrast Sensitivity in Healthy Individuals: A Pilot Study. Turk J Ophthalmol. 2017
  6. 47(2):80-84. [6]Mapp AP, Ono H, Barbeito R. What does the dominant eye dominate? A brief and somewhat contentious review. Percept Psychophys. 2003
  7. 65(2):310-17. [7]McManus IC, Porac C, Bryden MP, et al. Eye-dominance, writing hand, and throwing hand. Laterality. 1999
  8. 4(2):173-92. [8]Ooi TL, He ZJ. Sensory Eye Dominance: Relationship Between Eye and Brain. Eye Brain. 2020
  9. Shneor E, Hochstein S. Eye dominance effects in feature search. Vision Res. 2006
  10. 46(25):4258-69. [10]Koçtekin B, Gündoğan NÜ, Altıntaş AG, et al. Relation of eye dominancy with color vision discrimination performance ability in normal subjects. Int J Ophthalmol. 2013
  11. 6(5):733-38. [11]Pekel G, Alagöz N, Pekel E, et al. Effects of ocular dominance on contrast sensitivity in middle-aged people. ISRN Ophthalmol. 2014
  12. 903084. [12]Seijas O, Gómez de Liaño P, Gómez de Liaño R, et al. Ocular dominance diagnosis and its influence in monovision. Am J Ophthalmol. 2007
  13. 144(2):209-216. [13]Richman J, Spaeth GL, Wirostko B. Contrast sensitivity basics and a critique of currently available tests. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2013
  14. 39(7):1100-1106. [14]Singman E, Matta N, Tian J, et al. The accuracy of the plusoptiX for measuring pupillary distance. Strabismus. 2014
  15. 22(1):21-25. [15]Johansson J, Seimyr GÖ, Pansell T. Eye dominance in binocular viewing conditions. J Vis. 2015
  16. 15(9):21. [16]Owsley C. Vision and Aging. Annu Rev Vis Sci. 2016
  17. Koctekin B, Coban DT, Ozen M, et al. Investigation of relationship between colour discrimination ability and stereoscopic acuity using Farnsworth Munsell 100 hue test and stereo tests. Can J Ophthalmol. 2020
  18. 55(2):131-36. [18]Owsley C, Sloane ME. Contrast sensitivity, acuity, and the perception of 'real-world' targets. Br J Ophthalmol. 1987
  19. 71(10):791- 96. [19]Rice ML, Leske DA, Smestad CE, et al. Results of ocular dominance testing depend on assessment me