Methods of visual acuity determination with the spatial frequency sweep visual evoked potential
- PMID: 15957609
- DOI: 10.1007/s10633-004-8053-7
Methods of visual acuity determination with the spatial frequency sweep visual evoked potential
Abstract
Purpose: The spatial frequency sweep visual evoked potential (sVEP) is used to rapidly determine visual acuity in children or non-responsive patients. Two techniques have been used to separate signal from noise: (1) the 95% confidence interval for the signal amplitude (95% CI) or (2) the amplitude of a Fourier frequency adjacent to 2x the signal frequency (DFT). The purpose of this study is to determine if there is a significant difference in acuity estimates with these techniques.
Methods: Ten normal subjects (approximately 0.00 logMAR acuity) and 11 patients with decreased visual acuity took part in this project. Stimulus production and data analysis were done with an Enfant 4010 (Neuroscientific Corp). Standard VEP recording techniques were employed. The stimulus was a horizontal-oriented, sine wave grating that swept up the spatial frequency spectrum (contrast 80%, temporal reversal rate 7.5 Hz). Sweeps were repeated until the confidence intervals for the data were no longer decreasing. The Bailey Lovie logMAR chart was used to determine visual acuity. A line was fit to the high spatial frequency data using either the 95% CI or the DFT as the noise estimate. By using these linear equations, acuity estimates were obtained at 0, 1, and 2 microV signal amplitudes.
Results: The average logMAR acuity for the subjects with normal acuity was -0.06 +/- 0.070 (SD). The sVEP acuity estimates were 0.08 +/- 0.098, 0.18 +/- 0.092, and 0.33 +/- 0.195 (0, 1, and 2 microV extrapolations) with the 95% CI used as noise and 0.07 +/- 0.100, 0.18 +/- 0.103, and 0.33 +/- 0.202 (0, 1, and 2 microV extrapolations) with the DFT used as noise. By using the average noise from the Fourier frequency as the extrapolation level, the acuity was 0.10 +/- 0.098 logMAR. The average logMAR acuity for the subjects with decreased visual acuity was 0.67 +/- 0.306 (SD). The sVEP acuity estimates were 0.53 +/- 0.175, 0.66 +/- 0.171, and 0.88 +/- 0.295 (0, 1, and 2 microV extrapolations) with the 95% CI used as noise and 0.53 +/- 0.179, 0.65 +/- 0.176, and 0.86 +/- 0.268 (0, 1, and 2 microV extrapolations) with the DFT used as noise. By using the average noise from the Fourier frequency as the extrapolation level, the acuity was 0.57 +/- 0.186 logMAR. No significant difference was found between the two acuity estimate techniques for all of the subjects (repeated measures ANOVA, p = 0.16, F20 = 2.131). The sVEP estimates of acuity to the 0 microV and noise levels were not significantly different from the logMAR acuity (paired t-test, all p values > 0.05).
Conclusions: The results indicate that the sVEP acuity does not depend on the noise estimation technique. In agreement with prior studies, the sVEP acuity underestimates the logMAR acuity in normally sighted individuals by about an octave.
Similar articles
-
A comparison of contrast sensitivity and sweep visual evoked potential (sVEP) acuity estimates in normal humans.Doc Ophthalmol. 2019 Dec;139(3):207-219. doi: 10.1007/s10633-019-09712-8. Epub 2019 Aug 14. Doc Ophthalmol. 2019. PMID: 31414313
-
VEP estimation of visual acuity: a systematic review.Doc Ophthalmol. 2021 Feb;142(1):25-74. doi: 10.1007/s10633-020-09770-3. Epub 2020 Jun 2. Doc Ophthalmol. 2021. PMID: 32488810 Free PMC article.
-
Comparing enfant and PowerDiva sweep visual evoked potential (sVEP) acuity estimates.Doc Ophthalmol. 2014 Oct;129(2):105-14. doi: 10.1007/s10633-014-9457-7. Epub 2014 Aug 24. Doc Ophthalmol. 2014. PMID: 25150841
-
Reliability of acuities determined with the sweep visual evoked potential (sVEP).Doc Ophthalmol. 2012 Apr;124(2):99-107. doi: 10.1007/s10633-012-9312-7. Epub 2012 Jan 20. Doc Ophthalmol. 2012. PMID: 22262233
-
The technique, validity and clinical use of the sweep VEP.Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 2008 Sep;28(5):393-403. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-1313.2008.00591.x. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 2008. PMID: 18761477 Review.
Cited by
-
A new method of extrapolating the sweep pattern visual evoked potential acuity.Doc Ophthalmol. 2008 Sep;117(2):85-91. doi: 10.1007/s10633-007-9095-4. Epub 2007 Oct 31. Doc Ophthalmol. 2008. PMID: 17972124
-
Assessment of Human Visual Acuity Using Visual Evoked Potential: A Review.Sensors (Basel). 2020 Sep 28;20(19):5542. doi: 10.3390/s20195542. Sensors (Basel). 2020. PMID: 32998208 Free PMC article. Review.
-
A comparison of contrast sensitivity and sweep visual evoked potential (sVEP) acuity estimates in normal humans.Doc Ophthalmol. 2019 Dec;139(3):207-219. doi: 10.1007/s10633-019-09712-8. Epub 2019 Aug 14. Doc Ophthalmol. 2019. PMID: 31414313
-
VEP estimation of visual acuity: a systematic review.Doc Ophthalmol. 2021 Feb;142(1):25-74. doi: 10.1007/s10633-020-09770-3. Epub 2020 Jun 2. Doc Ophthalmol. 2021. PMID: 32488810 Free PMC article.
-
Conducting shorter VEP tests to estimate visual acuity via assessment of SNR.Doc Ophthalmol. 2013 Feb;126(1):21-8. doi: 10.1007/s10633-012-9355-9. Epub 2012 Oct 26. Doc Ophthalmol. 2013. PMID: 23099657
References
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical