Web-based Vs. Conventional: a Comprehensive Analysis of Visual Acuity Assessment Using the PocDoc Tool in a Tertiary Eye Care Centre

Overview

Journal Eye (Lond)

Specialty Ophthalmology

Date 2024 Oct 17

PMID 39420108

Authors

Joewee Boon

Jue Shao Goh

William Rojas-Carabali

Marilyn Puah

Bernett Lee

Rajesh Rajagopalan

Bryan Ang

Rupesh Agrawal

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: Visual acuity (VA) represents a fundamental measure of visual function. The significant prevalence of underdiagnosed ocular disorders underscores the importance of effective VA assessment. This study evaluates the efficacy of a web-based VA assessment tool ("PocDoc") versus conventional VA testing.

Methods: Prospective observational study including 353 participants recruited from various eye clinics in a tertiary referral centre. Age, diagnosis, and VA related information (i.e. VA measurements from PocDoc and conventional VA test [Snellen chart], test type, etc) were collected. Spearman's rank correlation, Intraclass Correlation, and Bland-Altman plot compared outcomes of both tests. One-way ANOVA and paired-T test were used to compare means.

Results: Most patients were males (59.2%) with a mean age of 52.2 ± 20.6 years. PocDoc had moderate positive correlation to conventional testing (rho = 0.50, p < 0.001). PocDoc led to higher logMAR scores compared to conventional testing (mean logMAR 0.19 and 0.13 respectively, p < 0.01). Moreover, PocDoc demonstrated a sensitivity of 82.8% and specificity of 79% for detecting visual impairment. The discrepancy between PocDoc and conventional VA testing increased with higher logMAR values, indicating greater inconsistency between the tests for patients with poorer VA. Age, test type, and disease type contributed to this variability.

Conclusions: The concordance between PocDoc and conventional testing for VA measurement across various ages and conditions makes it a suitable screening tool. Future technological inventions should consider age, test type, and disease type as critical factors related to the level of agreement and correlation between digital and conventional VA testing methods.

References

Thirunavukarasu A, Mullinger D, Rufus-Toye R, Farrell S, Allen L . Clinical validation of a novel web-application for remote assessment of distance visual acuity. Eye (Lond). 2021; 36(10):2057-2061. PMC: 8403827. DOI: 10.1038/s41433-021-01760-2. View

Johnson C, Casson E . Effects of luminance, contrast, and blur on visual acuity. Optom Vis Sci. 1995; 72(12):864-9. DOI: 10.1097/00006324-199512000-00004. View

Sah S, Liu R, Lai H, Agrawal M, Jain P, Agashe P . Improving Access to Eye Care in Rural Communities: PocDoc's Web-Based Visual Acuity Screening Tool. Telemed J E Health. 2023; 30(3):763-770. DOI: 10.1089/tmj.2023.0234. View

Dandona L, Dandona R . Revision of visual impairment definitions in the International Statistical Classification of Diseases. BMC Med. 2006; 4:7. PMC: 1435919. DOI: 10.1186/1741-7015-4-7. View

Black J, Jacobs R, Phillips G, Chen L, Tan E, Tran A . An assessment of the iPad as a testing platform for distance visual acuity in adults. BMJ Open. 2013; 3(6). PMC: 3693417. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2013-002730. View

Tiraset N, Poonyathalang A, Padungkiatsagul T, Deeyai M, Vichitkunakorn P, Vanikieti K . Comparison of Visual Acuity Measurement Using Three Methods: Standard ETDRS Chart, Near Chart and a Smartphone-Based Eye Chart Application. Clin Ophthalmol. 2021; 15:859-869. PMC: 7924116. DOI: 10.2147/OPTH.S304272. View

Kniestedt C, Stamper R . Visual acuity and its measurement. Ophthalmol Clin North Am. 2003; 16(2):155-70, v. DOI: 10.1016/s0896-1549(03)00013-0. View

Satgunam P, Thakur M, Sachdeva V, Reddy S, Rani P . Validation of visual acuity applications for teleophthalmology during COVID-19. Indian J Ophthalmol. 2020; 69(2):385-390. PMC: 7933864. DOI: 10.4103/ijo.IJO_2333_20. View

Tiew S, Lim C, Sivagnanasithiyar T . Using an excel spreadsheet to convert Snellen visual acuity to LogMAR visual acuity. Eye (Lond). 2020; 34(11):2148-2149. PMC: 7784686. DOI: 10.1038/s41433-020-0783-6. View

10.

Sahli E, Idil A . A Common Approach to Low Vision: Examination and Rehabilitation of the Patient with Low Vision. Turk J Ophthalmol. 2019; 49(2):89-98. PMC: 6517854. DOI: 10.4274/tjo.galenos.2018.65928. View

11.

. Trends in prevalence of blindness and distance and near vision impairment over 30 years: an analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study. Lancet Glob Health. 2020; 9(2):e130-e143. PMC: 7820390. DOI: 10.1016/S2214-109X(20)30425-3. View

12.

Chen T, Li J, Schallhorn J, Sun C . Comparing a Home Vision Self-Assessment Test to Office-Based Snellen Visual Acuity. Clin Ophthalmol. 2021; 15:3205-3211. PMC: 8326937. DOI: 10.2147/OPTH.S309727. View

13.

Steren B, Young B, Chow J . Visual Acuity Testing for Telehealth Using Mobile Applications. JAMA Ophthalmol. 2021; 139(3):344-347. PMC: 7809609. DOI: 10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2020.6177. View

14.

Claessens J, van Egmond J, Wanten J, Bauer N, Nuijts R, Wisse R . The Accuracy of a Web-Based Visual Acuity Self-assessment Tool Performed Independently by Eye Care Patients at Home: Method Comparison Study. JMIR Form Res. 2023; 7:e41045. PMC: 9909522. DOI: 10.2196/41045. View

15.

Bastawrous A, Rono H, Livingstone I, Weiss H, Jordan S, Kuper H . Development and Validation of a Smartphone-Based Visual Acuity Test (Peek Acuity) for Clinical Practice and Community-Based Fieldwork. JAMA Ophthalmol. 2015; 133(8):930-7. PMC: 5321502. DOI: 10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2015.1468. View

16.

Suo L, Ke X, Zhang D, Qin X, Chen X, Hong Y . Use of Mobile Apps for Visual Acuity Assessment: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2022; 10(2):e26275. PMC: 8887635. DOI: 10.2196/26275. View

17.

Carkeet A, Lister L . Computer monitor pixellation and Sloan letter visual acuity measurement. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 2017; 38(2):144-151. DOI: 10.1111/opo.12434. View

18.

. Causes of blindness and vision impairment in 2020 and trends over 30 years, and prevalence of avoidable blindness in relation to VISION 2020: the Right to Sight: an analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study. Lancet Glob Health. 2020; 9(2):e144-e160. PMC: 7820391. DOI: 10.1016/S2214-109X(20)30489-7. View

19.

Bourne R, Flaxman S, Braithwaite T, Cicinelli M, Das A, Jonas J . Magnitude, temporal trends, and projections of the global prevalence of blindness and distance and near vision impairment: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Glob Health. 2017; 5(9):e888-e897. DOI: 10.1016/S2214-109X(17)30293-0. View

20.

Bellsmith K, Gale M, Yang S, Nguyen I, Prentiss C, Nguyen L . Validation of Home Visual Acuity Tests for Telehealth in the COVID-19 Era. JAMA Ophthalmol. 2022; 140(5):465-471. PMC: 8972145. DOI: 10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2022.0396. View