Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2016 Feb;254(2):373-84.
doi: 10.1007/s00417-015-3020-4. Epub 2015 Apr 29.

Marked dissociation of photopic and mesopic contrast sensitivity even in normal observers

Hannah Hertenstein  1 , Michael Bach  2 , Nikolai Johannes Gross  1 , Flemming Beisse  3
Affiliations

Marked dissociation of photopic and mesopic contrast sensitivity even in normal observers

Hannah Hertenstein et al. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2016 Feb.

Abstract

Aim: Although contrast vision is not routinely tested, it is important: for instance, it predicts traffic incidents better than visual acuity. Mesopic contrast sensitivity (CS) testing approximates low-lighting conditions but entails dark adaptation, which can disrupt clinical routine. In receptor-specific diseases, a dissociation of photopic and mesopic sensitivity would be expected, but can photopic CS act as a surrogate measure for mesopic CS, at least for screening purposes?

Methods: Photopic and mesopic contrast sensitivities were studied in three groups: 47 normal subjects, 23 subjects with glaucoma, and three subjects with cataract. Twenty-eight of the normal subjects were additionally tested with artificial blur. Photopic contrast sensitivity was assessed with both the Freiburg Acuity and Contrast Test (FrACT) and the Mars Letter Contrast Sensitivity Charts. Mesopic contrast sensitivity, without and with glare, was measured with the Mesoptometer IIb. Coefficients of repeatability and limits of agreement were calculated for all tests.

Results: Test-retest limits of agreement were ± 0.17 logCS for Mars, ± 0.21 logCS for FrACT, and ±0.20 logCS / ± 0.14 logCS for Mesoptometer IIb without and with glare, respectively. In terms of inter-test comparison, Mars and FrACT largely agreed, except for ceiling effects in the Mars test. While mesopic and photopic contrast sensitivities correlate significantly (r = 0.51, p < 0.01), only 27 % of the variance is in common. In particular, subjects with high photopic results may be nearly as likely to have low as well as high mesopic results.

Conclusions: The photopic contrast sensitivity tests assessed here cannot serve as surrogate measures for current mesopic contrast sensitivity tests. Low photopic CS predicts low mesopic CS, but with normal photopic CS, mesopic CS can be normal or pathologic.

Keywords: Age; Cones; Contrast sensitivity; Mesopic vision; Photopic vision; Rods; Traffic.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Br J Ophthalmol. 2014 Mar;98(3):383-6 - PubMed
    1. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2006 Jun;47(6):2739-45 - PubMed
    1. J Physiol. 1969 Jul;203(1):237-60 - PubMed
    1. Stat Methods Med Res. 1999 Jun;8(2):135-60 - PubMed
    1. Br J Ophthalmol. 2005 Mar;89(3):345-51 - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources