Comparison of visual acuity in macular degeneration patients measured with snellen and early treatment diabetic retinopathy study charts.
OBJECTIVE
To compare the measurements of visual acuity (VA) results measured with Snellen and Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) charts in eyes with and without age-related macular degeneration (AMD).


METHODS
Cross-sectional study.


METHODS
One hundred four participants (190 eyes) selected from a university retina practice; 80 participants (142 eyes) had some degree of AMD.


METHODS
Visual acuity was measured in each patient using standard procedure with both Snellen and ETDRS charts in random order. Statistical analysis of the results was performed.


METHODS
Difference in VA measured by both charts in logarithm of minimal angle of resolution (logMAR) notations.


RESULTS
Overall, the mean Snellen VA was 0.78 logMAR (= 20/120), and the mean ETDRS VA in the same eye was 0.54 logMAR (= 20/70; P<0.001). In the low vision group (<20/200), represented by patients with AMD, the average difference in number of lines was considerably larger than in the good vision range (>20/30). On average, 20/200 on Snellen was 20/95 on ETDRS (>3 lines difference), and 20/30 on Snellen was 20/25 on ETDRS (<1 line difference).


CONCLUSIONS
Our results show poor agreement between the Snellen and ETDRS charts, and it was more pronounced in the group with poor vision. The ETDRS measurements yielded better VA, particularly in participants with vision <20/200 (representing more advanced AMD patients). We suggest taking these findings into consideration when comparing outcomes in clinical practices (which typically measure VA using standard Snellen charts) with outcomes from clinical trials (which typically measure VA using ETDRS charts).
Falkenstein
Iryna A
IA
Joan and Irwin Jacobs Retina Center, Department of Ophthalmology, Shiley Eye Center, University of California, La Jolla, California 92037, USA.
Cochran
Denine E
DE
Azen
Stanley P
SP
Dustin
Laurie
L
Tammewar
Ajay M
AM
Kozak
Igor
I
Freeman
William R
WR
D003430:Cross-Sectional Studies; D006801:Humans; D008268:Macular Degeneration / Q000503:physiopathology*; D015203:Reproducibility of Results; D014787:Vision Tests / Q000295:instrumentation / Q000592:standards*; D014792:Visual Acuity / Q000502:physiology*
BMJ. 2000 Oct 21;321(7267):990-2
11039964
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2006 Mar;47(3):1236-40
16505064
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2001 May;42(6):1226-31
11328731
Am J Ophthalmol. 2003 Feb;135(2):194-205
12566024
Ophthalmol Clin North Am. 2003 Jun;16(2):155-70, v
12809155
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2003 Aug;44(8):3294-300
12882773
Br J Ophthalmol. 2003 Oct;87(10):1232-4
14507755
Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2003 Dec;241(12):968-74
13680248
Am J Optom Physiol Opt. 1976 Nov;53(11):740-5
998716
Br J Ophthalmol. 1980 Jun;64(6):457-60
7387972
Adv Ophthalmol. 1980;41:103-48
7001873
Am J Ophthalmol. 1982 Jul;94(1):91-6
7091289
J Am Optom Assoc. 1984 May;55(5):359-61
6725833
Am J Optom Physiol Opt. 1984 Sep;61(9):595-600
6507580
Lancet. 1986 Feb 8;1(8476):307-10
2868172
Arch Ophthalmol. 1988 Jan;106(1):55-7
3337707
Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 1988;8(4):363-70
3253626
Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 1988;8(4):397-401
3253632
Br J Ophthalmol. 1989 Jun;73(6):457-60
2751979
Retina. 1989;9(3):163-9
2480626
Ophthalmology. 1992 Jun;99(6):969-75; discussion 975-6
1630786
Doc Ophthalmol. 1993;84(2):135-44
8299504
BMJ. 1994 Nov 26;309(6966):1408
7755711
Optom Vis Sci. 1998 May;75(5):342-8
9624699
Am J Ophthalmol. 1959 Dec;48:807-13
13831682
Acta Ophthalmol Scand. 2005 Jun;83(3):328-32
15948786
Optom Vis Sci. 2005 Nov;82(11):946-54
16317369
Clin Experiment Ophthalmol. 2006 Jan-Feb;34(1):6-8
16451251
Br J Ophthalmol. 2001 Apr;85(4):432-6
11264133