Lateral gain is impaired in macular degeneration and can be targeted to restore vision in mice.

Macular degeneration is a leading cause of blindness. Treatments to rescue vision are currently limited. Here, we study how loss of central vision affects lateral feedback to spared areas of the human retina. We identify a cone-driven gain control mechanism that reduces visual function beyond the atrophic area in macular degeneration. This finding provides an insight into the negative effects of geographic atrophy on vision. Therefore, we develop a strategy to restore this feedback mechanism, through activation of laterally projecting cells. This results in improved vision in Cnga3-/- mice, which lack cone function, as well as a mouse model of geographic atrophy. Our work shows that a loss of lateral gain control contributes to the vision deficit in macular degeneration. Furthermore, in mouse models we show that lateral feedback can be harnessed to improve vision following retinal degeneration.

The effect of retinal image slip on peripheral visual acuity.

Retinal image slip promoted by fixational eye movements prevents image fading in central vision. However, in the periphery a higher amount of movement is necessary to prevent this fading. We assessed the effect of different levels of retinal image slip in peripheral vision by measuring peripheral visual acuity (VA), with and without crowding, while modulating retinal image slip by using gaze-linked stimuli. Measurements were carried out at four isoeccentric positions at 5 and at 10 degrees eccentricity. Gaze position was monitored throughout using an infrared eyetracker. The target was presented for up to 500 msec, either with no retinal image slip, with reduced retinal slip, or with increased retinal image slip. Without crowding, peripheral visual acuity improved with increased retinal image slip compared with the other two conditions. In contrast to the previous result, under crowded conditions, peripheral visual acuity decreased markedly with increased retinal image slip. Therefore, the effects of increased retinal image slip are different for simple (noncrowded) and more complex (crowded) visual tasks. These results provide further evidence for the importance of fixation stability on complex visual tasks when using the peripheral retina.

Visual function and quality of life following vitrectomy and epiretinal membrane peel surgery.

AIM: To investigate the effect of epiretinal membrane (ERM) peel on patients' health related quality of life (HR-QOL) and to explore the association between self reported HR-QOL and conventional measures of visual function. METHODS: The National Eye Institute 25 Item Visual Function Questionnaire (VFQ-25) and the 36 Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) were self administered by 20 patients before and 4 months following surgery. Preoperative and postoperative data collected included logMAR near and distant visual acuity (VA), contrast sensitivity, and metamorphopsia. Questionnaire scores were compared preoperatively and postoperatively and their correlation with traditional methods of visual function evaluation analysed. RESULTS: Postoperatively there was no significant improvement in mean logMAR VA. However, eight (40%) subjects improved by two or more ETDRS lines and nine eyes (45%) reached a final VA of 6/18 or better. Metamorphopsia decreased significantly (p = 0.019) and there was significant improvement in VFQ-25 mean scores for the general vision (p = 0.03), distance activities (p = 0.05), and composite score (p = 0.03). Baseline binocular VA was significantly correlated with baseline VFQ-25 composite score (r = 0.631, p = 0.004). CONCLUSIONS: ERM surgery appears to improve patients' subjective perception of visual function as indicated by higher composite scores in VFQ-25 and improved metamorphopsia in the absence of significant improvement in mean logMAR VA.

Monocular versus binocular visual acuity as measures of vision impairment and predictors of visual disability.

PURPOSE: To examine the relationship between monocular and binocular visual acuities as predictors of visual disability in a population-based sample of individuals 65 years of age and older. METHODS: Two thousand five hundred twenty community-dwelling residents of Salisbury, Maryland, between the ages of 65 and 84 years of age were recruited for the study. Corrected visual acuity was measured monocularly and binocularly using ETDRS charts. Reading speed, face discrimination, and self-reported difficulty with visual tasks were also determined. RESULTS: Binocular acuity is predicted with reasonable accuracy by acuity in the better eye alone, but not by the widely used American Medical Association (AMA) weighted-average algorithm. The AMA algorithm significantly underestimates binocular acuity when the interocular acuity difference exceeds one line. Monocular acuity and binocular acuity were significantly better predictors of reading speed than the AMA weighted score or a recently proposed Functional Vision Score (FVS). Monocular acuity in the better eye, binocular acuity, and the AMA and FVS algorithms were equally good predictors of self-reported vision disability. None of the acuity measures were good predictors of face recognition ability. CONCLUSIONS: The binocular acuities of older individuals can be inferred from measures of monocular acuity. There is little evidence for binocular inhibition when the monocular acuities in the two eyes are unequal, as opposed to the widely used AMA algorithm for computing binocular visual impairment. For tasks that are strongly associated with visual acuity, such as reading, this association can be captured from measures of monocular acuity and does not require separate assessment of binocular acuity.

Mobility performance in glaucoma.

PURPOSE: To determine whether glaucoma affects mobility performance and whether there is a relationship between mobility performance and stage of disease as estimated from vision-function measures. METHODS: The mobility performance of 47 glaucoma subjects was compared with that of 47 normal-vision subjects who were of similar age. Mobility performance was assessed by the time required to complete an established travel path and the number of mobility incidents. The subjective assessment of falling and fear of falling were also compared. Vision function was assessed by measures of visual acuity, contrast sensitivity, monocular automated threshold perimetry, and suprathreshold; binocular visual fields were assessed with the Esterman test. RESULTS: The glaucoma subjects walked on average 10% more slowly than did the normal-vision subjects. The number of people who experienced bumps, stumbles, or orientation problems was almost twice as high in the glaucoma group than the normal-vision group, but the difference did not reach statistical significance. The difference between groups also was not significant with respect to the number of people who reported falling in the past year (38% for the glaucoma group and 30% for the normal-vision group) or a fear of falling (28% for the glaucoma group and 23% for the normal-vision group). The visual fields assessed with a Humphrey 24-2 test were more highly correlated with walking speed in glaucoma than the visual fields scored by the Esterman scale or than visual acuity or contrast sensitivity. CONCLUSIONS: Glaucoma is associated with a modest decrease in mobility performance. Walking speed decreases with severity of the disease as estimated by threshold perimetry.

Landmark-driven fundus perimetry using the scanning laser ophthalmoscope.

PURPOSE: To present a new method of performing scanning laser ophthalmoscope perimetry that compensates for eye movements so that the correct retinal location is tested even if fixation changes. This allows for accurate testing of patients with central scotomas and for repeating testing longitudinally at the same retinal locations even if central fixation is lost. METHODS: The operator views the retina and selects a retinal landmark, such as a vessel bifurcation, that can be identified easily. A testing strategy is preselected, and the computer saves the landmark and stimulus coordinates. To present each stimulus, the operator positions a cursor over the retinal landmark, and the computer adjusts the site of presentation of the stimulus for any change in landmark position caused by an eye movement. At the conclusion of the testing, the results are displayed in the proper retinal location on a fundus image. RESULTS: Sixty-seven eyes with macular disease were tested with the landmark-driven method, using the same preplanned strategy for each eye for both a bright and a dim stimulus. There was a low rate of inconsistent points (seen with dim but not bright stimuli), and virtually all of these bordered a dense scotoma. Those eyes with more inconsistent points had a significantly greater percentage of dense scotoma points and significantly lower visual acuity. The technique significantly corrected error in retinal localization resulting from large eye movement. There is no significant rotation or magnification change during the procedure, so specifying the change in location of one landmark is sufficient to describe movement of the retina. The technique is rapid and easy to administer to elderly patients and to children. CONCLUSIONS: This technique allows for accurate and repeatable measures of retinal sensitivity in specific locations. It is useful in following change over time. It can be developed further to allow for fully automated, retinally correct testing.

Self-reported assessment of visual function in a population-based study: the SEE project. Salisbury Eye Evaluation.

PURPOSE: To report on the usefulness of the Activities of Daily Vision Scale (ADVS) questionnaire for assessing visual functioning, a population-based sample of elderly Americans. METHODS: The ADVS questionnaire was administered to a population-based sample of 2520 community-dwelling individuals 65 to 84 years of age in Salisbury, MD. Items and subscales were evaluated for internal consistency, item discrimination, and content validity. Published subscale groupings and item associations in our population were compared for coherence using correlation, factor, and cluster analyses. Whole-sample and race- and gender-specific analyses were conducted. External validity was explored by regressing ADVS scores on standard psychophysical vision measures. RESULTS: ADVS scores were skewed to high visual functioning levels; approximately 60% of the population had function scores of 95 or better (of a possible 100). The overall, night driving, and near vision scales were internally consistent and had strong item-subscale associations; the day driving and glare subscales were not acceptable regarding these properties. The far vision subscale was acceptably scalable but only weakly differentiated from the other subscales. Overall, night driving, near vision, and far vision scores were all statistically and independently associated with multiple psychophysical vision measures. Findings were consistent across race and gender subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: As assessed by the ADVS, reported visual functioning is high in our representative older population. The overall scale and selected subscales effectively distinguish persons along a spectrum of ability. They correlate with measures of visual impairment in a reasonable way and thus hold promise for risk factor investigations. The published day driving and glare subscales should be examined for relevance and consistency before being applied in population-based settings. Methods specific to population-based settings should be investigated for their ability to better elicit additional visual function dimensions and early visual disability.

A comprehensive assessment of visual impairment in a population of older Americans. The SEE Study. Salisbury Eye Evaluation Project.

PURPOSE: The Salisbury Eye Evaluation Project is a longitudinal study of risk factors for age-related eye diseases and the impact of eye disease and visual impairment on physical disability. In this article, the authors report the prevalence of visual impairment in their population and explore the relations among the various measures of visual function. METHODS: A population-based sample of 2520 residents of Salisbury, Maryland, between the ages of 65 and 84 years were enrolled in the study. Twenty-six percent of participants were black. Vision tests included best-corrected Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study acuity, Pelli-Robson contrast sensitivity with and without glare, Randot stereoacuity, and 60 degrees Humphrey visual fields. RESULTS: Visual function decreased linearly with age for the acuity, contrast sensitivity, glare, and visual field tests. Stereoacuity remained constant into the mid-70s and declined at an accelerating rate thereafter. Black participants had lower contrast sensitivity, reduced stereoacuity, and worse visual fields, at all ages compared to white participants; however, white participants were more sensitive to glare. The overall prevalence of visual acuity impairment in blacks was 5.6% versus 3.0% for whites, using the traditional United States definition (worse than 20/40 to better than 20/200) and 3.3% for blacks versus 1.6% for whites, using the World Health Organization definition (worse than 20/60 to 20/400). Acuity was correlated moderately with contrast sensitivity, stereoacuity, and visual fields (Spearman rho = 0.50, 0.35, and 0.34, respectively). The correlation between acuity and glare sensitivity was low (rho = 0.12). CONCLUSIONS: Many aspects of visual function, not just acuity, decline with age. Black participants have more visual impairement than do white participants for all tests except glare sensitivity. The prevalence of visual acuity impairement in the Salisbury Eye Evaluation population is lower than that reported by other studies using similar test procedures. Low-to-moderate correlations among vision test scores suggest that several different dimensions of visual function are being assessed.

Function and visual impairment in a population-based study of older adults. The SEE project. Salisbury Eye Evaluation.

PURPOSE: The Salisbury Eye Evaluation (SEE) project investigates the impact of vision on functional status in a population-based sample of elderly persons. The prevalence of self-reports of functional status and the association with visual acuity loss are described. METHODS: A random sample of men and women 65 to 84 years of age from Salisbury, Maryland were recruited for home interviews and clinic examinations. Of the eligible sample, 78% responded to the home questionnaire and 65% responded to the questionnaire and the clinic examination. Binocular visual acuity of each person was measured using ETDRS charts and protocols. Questions were asked concerning activities of daily living, instrumental activities of daily living, physical function, social interaction, and activities of daily vision. Analyses of the association of presenting visual acuity worse than 20/40 with the measures of function were carried out and adjusted for age, race, and sex. RESULTS: All measures of functional status showed a decline with age; women and blacks were more likely to report difficulties. The age-adjusted proportions of those with visual impairment were not significantly different between men and women (7.2% versus 6.7%; P = 0.60). Black persons had almost twice the rate (10.4%) of white persons (5.6%; P < 0.001). Age, race, gender, and visual impairment were all significantly related to declines in functional status in multivariate models. CONCLUSIONS: Data on functional status in the project population were similar to national data and confirmed higher rates of disability in women and blacks. Binocular visual acuity worse than 20/40 appeared to have an impact on all the self-report measures of functional status. Further analyses on the interaction of vision with other comorbid conditions on function status clearly are indicated.

Characteristics of discrepancies between self-reported visual function and measured reading speed. Salisbury Eye Evaluation Project Team.

PURPOSE: Visual impairment is a risk factor for morbidity in the elderly and is often screened for by self-report. This study evaluates whether there are subsets for whom there is a discrepancy between self-reported and measured function. METHODS: The prevalence of a discrepancy between self-reported difficulty reading a newspaper and measured reading speed was determined in 2520 community-based men and women, aged 65 to 84 years, and the discrepant group characterized by polychotomous regression. RESULTS: Of subjects who reported minimal difficulty reading a newspaper, 10.8% (227/2107) read newsprint-sized text (0.21 degrees) more slowly than 80 words/min, a level previously shown to be necessary for sustained reading. Poor visual acuity, presence of psychiatric symptoms, and less satisfaction with vision were associated with being in the group that read slowly and reported difficulty with reading. Better cognition, better visual acuity, more years of education, white race, and fewer psychiatric symptoms were associated with being in the group that read more quickly and reported minimal difficulty. When reading the text size at which subjects read their fastest, only 2.6% of those with minimal difficulty remained discrepant. These individuals were more likely to have less education, be male, be African American, and have poorer cognitive status than those who did not remain discrepant. CONCLUSIONS: A subset of the elderly population have a substantial discrepancy between self-reported reading difficulty and measured reading speed. In some, this discrepancy may be based on underlying expectations and experiences, and in others it may represent a transition from no visual impairment to visual impairment.

The association of multiple visual impairments with self-reported visual disability: SEE project.

PURPOSE: This report examines the relationship between psychophysical measures of visual impairment and self-reported difficulty with everyday visual tasks in a population-based sample of individuals 65 years of age and older. METHODS: Community-dwelling residents (n = 2520) of Salisbury, MD, between the ages of 65 and 84 were recruited for the study. Visual acuity under normal and low luminance, contrast and glare sensitivity, stereoacuity, and visual fields were measured. Subjective physical disability was assessed with the Activities of Daily Vision Scale (ADVS). RESULTS: In multiple regression analyses adjusted for demographic factors, cognitive status, depression, and number of comorbid medical conditions, each of the vision tests except low luminance acuity was independently associated with lower ADVS scores. The analyses indicate that a factor of 2 reduction in visual acuity or contrast sensitivity, comparable with that observed in mild to moderate lens opacity, was associated with a three- to fivefold odds of reporting difficulty with daily tasks. Although age alone was a significant risk factor for disability, it was not associated with overall ADVS score, once visual impairment and other chronic medical conditions were taken into account. CONCLUSIONS: Visual acuity, contrast and glare sensitivity, stereoacuity, and visual fields are significant independent risk factors for self-reported visual disability in an older population. Visual impairment defined by acuity alone is not the only dimension of the association with subjective disability. Additional vision measures are required to understand the impact of vision loss on everyday life.

Who participates in population based studies of visual impairment? The Salisbury Eye Evaluation project experience.

PURPOSE: To describe characteristics of respondents and nonrespondents to a home questionnaire and comprehensive clinical examination in a population of elderly Americans. METHODS: The SEE project is a population-based study of age-related eye diseases, visual impairment, and functional status of individuals aged 65 to 84. Potential participants were identified using the Health Care Financing Administration Medicare data base for Salisbury, MD: After sending out an introductory letter, a trained interviewer visited potential participants in their homes, obtained their consent to participate, administered a short screening interview that included questions about their general health and vision, and administered an extensive questionnaire on their diet, medical history, and difficulty performing activities related to vision. The interviewer then scheduled an appointment for the participants to visit a central site for an exam. Potential participants could fall into one of two refusal groups; refusal to take part in the study before the home questionnaire or prior to the clinic visit. RESULTS: The overall response rate for the clinic visit was 65%. Compared to individuals with complete exams, the two groups of refusals were older, less likely to have any college education, more likely to report poor health status, and more likely to need help with Independent Activities of Daily Living (IADL's). Participants with complete home questionnaires that failed to come to the clinic were more likely to have Mini-Mental scores below 25. There were not significant differences by race, gender, or self reported vision status among the three groups. CONCLUSIONS: Population-based studies requiring an in-clinic examination may selectively under-sample those with health and mental difficulties. These differential responses may introduce bias in the study results and need to be addressed when assessing the burden, type and severity of disease in the community. However, self-report of visual status was similar among refusals and participants in this study on vision.

The association of postoperative subjective visual function with acuity, glare, and contrast sensitivity in patients with early cataract.

BACKGROUND: It has been shown in our previous studies that early cataracts affect vision in ways that can be measured by objective means and that this objective impairment in visual acuity, glare, and contrast sensitivity can be successfully reversed by cataract surgery. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association of subjective visual function with objective measures of acuity, glare, and contrast sensitivity in patients who were symptomatic from early cataract. METHODS: We administered a task-oriented questionnaire prior to and 4 months after cataract surgery to patients who were symptomatic from early cataract (median preoperative ETDRS [Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study] visual acuity of 20/40 [range, 20/20 to 20/80]); ETDRS visual acuity, disability glare, and contrast sensitivity were also measured at those times. RESULTS: Uncomplicated cataract surgery resulted in resolution or improvement of subjective symptoms for the great majority of subjects, and in a few subjects new symptoms developed or current symptoms worsened. We found a positive association between postoperative improvement in subjective visual function (as measured by the questionnaire) and postoperative improvement in objective visual function (as measured by visual acuity and contrast sensitivity). We also found that the greater the degree of preoperative impairment in objective visual function (as measured by visual acuity and contrast sensitivity), the greater the postoperative improvement in subjective visual function (as measured by the questionnaire). No such association was found for our disability glare test. CONCLUSIONS: Cataract surgery for symptomatic individuals with mild impairment in visual acuity does relieve visual symptoms, and preoperative measurement of contrast sensitivity can help determine who with early cataract is most likely to report subjective improvement in vision.

Comparison of acuity, contrast sensitivity, and disability glare before and after cataract surgery.

We assessed vision before and after uncomplicated extracapsular cataract extraction and intraocular lens implantation in 72 symptomatic patients with acuity equal to or better than 20/80 and no other ocular abnormality. Contrast sensitivity was measured with the Pelli-Robson Letter Chart (Metropia Ltd, Cambridge, England) and disability glare was measured under daytime conditions with the Brightness Acuity Tester (Mentor O&O Inc, Norwell, Mass) and under nighttime conditions with a computer-controlled video display. Prior to surgery there was significant disability glare that was not correlated with acuity. There was also a loss in contrast sensitivity that was moderately correlated with acuity (r = -.43; P < .001). Following surgery, most patients' scores returned to normal on all tests. Improvement in disability glare and contrast sensitivity was independent of improvement in acuity. Furthermore, patients with the poorest preoperative vision were as likely to regain normal function after surgery as those with the best preoperative vision.

The effect of early cataracts on glare and contrast sensitivity. A pilot study.

To establish the effect of cataracts on glare and contrast sensitivity, we graded type and amount of lens opacity in 110 subjects who underwent two glare tests (Brightness Acuity Tester and Berkeley glare test) and two contrast sensitivity tests (a sine-wave test and Pelli-Robson chart). Twenty-seven subjects (25%) had clear lenses (mean visual acuity of 20/20) and 83 subjects (75%) had early lens opacities (mean visual acuity of 20/40) in otherwise normal eyes. Multiple regression techniques were used to control for the effects of age and visual acuity. Glare test scores were significantly lower for nearly all patients with lens opacities than for patients with clear lenses and were the lowest for patients with lenses with posterior subcapsular opacity. Contrast sensitivity scores were lower for all patients with lens opacities than for patients with clear lenses at high frequencies only; all lens opacity groups scores similarly with each other. These results indicate reduced visual function among patients with cataracts whose visual acuity is only minimally impaired.

Causes of blindness and visual impairment in a population of older Americans: The Salisbury Eye Evaluation Study.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the causes of blindness and visual impairment in a population-based sample of older Americans. METHODS: A random sample of 3821 residents of Salisbury, Md, between the ages of 65 and 84 years was identified from Medicare records. Sixty-six percent (2520 persons) agreed to undergo an eye examination; 26% of the participants were African American. The clinical examination included acuity testing with an Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study chart and standardized refraction testing for those with a visual acuity worse than 20/30, slitlamp and dilated retinal examination by an ophthalmologist, tonometry, lens and fundus photography, and a suprathreshold visual field test. Visual impairment was defined as a best-corrected acuity in the better-seeing eye worse than 20/40 and better than 20/200, while blindness was acuity in the better-seeing eye of 20/200 or worse. For those with a visual acuity worse than 20/40 in either eye, one or more causes were assigned by an ophthalmologist and a final cause for each eye was confirmed by a panel of 3 subspecialty ophthalmologists (O.D.S., H.A.Q., and S.B.B.) based on all available evidence. RESULTS: Bilateral presenting acuity worse than 20/40 increased from 4% in the 65- to 74-year age group to 16% in the 80- to 84-year age group. One third of those with presenting acuity worse than 20/40 improved to 20/40 or better with refraction. Overall, 4.5% had a best-corrected acuity worse than 20/40. African Americans were more likely to remain visually impaired than were whites despite refraction (odds ratio [95% confidence interval], 1.7 [1.1-2.6]). Whites were most often impaired or blind from age-related macular degeneration (1.2% vs 0.5%; P=.09). African Americans had higher rates of impairment and blindness from cataract or posterior capsular opacification (2.7% vs 1.1%; P=.006), glaucoma (0.9% vs 0.1%; P=.006), and diabetic retinopathy (1.2% vs 0.2%; P=. 004). CONCLUSIONS: More than half of those with visual impairment or blindness had conditions that were either surgically treatable or potentially preventable. African Americans had a disproportionate number of blinding diseases, particularly those amenable to eye care intervention. Targeted interventions for specific populations to increase appropriate eye care use would greatly improve vision and function in older Americans. Arch Ophthalmol. 2000;118:819-825

Mixed lens opacities and subsequent mortality.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have found an association between cataract or lens opacity and increased risk of mortality. Further work on determining explanatory factors for this association is needed. OBJECTIVES: To determine, in a population-based cohort of older persons, the 2-year risk of death associated with different types of lens opacities; whether an association of mortality and lens opacity is explained by confounding risk factors such as smoking, diabetes, age, race, and sex, which are known to be related to opacity and mortality; whether lens opacity is a marker for health status; and whether there are differences in cause-specific mortality for persons with and without lens opacity. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Two-year mortality rate. METHODS: The Salisbury Eye Evaluation Project consists of a random sample of 2520 residents of Salisbury, Md, aged 65 to 84 years. At baseline, lens photographs were taken to document nuclear, cortical, posterior subcapsular cataract, and mixed opacities. Data on education, smoking, alcohol use, hypertension, diabetes and other comorbid conditions, handgrip strength, and body mass index were also collected. Two-year follow-up was conducted for mortality and cause of death. RESULTS: Nuclear opacity, particularly severe nuclear opacity, and mixed opacities with nuclear were significant predictors of mortality independent of body mass index, comorbid conditions, smoking, age, race, and sex (mixed nuclear: odds ratio, 2.23; 95% confidence interval, 1.26-3.95). CONCLUSION: Lens opacity status is an independent predictor of 2-year mortality, an association that could not be explained by potential confounders.

Assessing functional status: correlation between performance on tasks conducted in a clinic setting and performance on the same task conducted at home. The Salisbury Eye Evaluation Project Team.

BACKGROUND: Many studies of functional status in elderly people use performance-based measures. There is an underlying assumption that these measures reflect, at least for some tasks, functional abilities in everyday tasks carried out at home. The purpose of this study was to determine the correlation between tasks carried out in the clinic and at home, and the role of visual impairment in performance at either setting. METHODS: We compared the performance of 97 participants in the Salisbury Eye Evaluation (SEE) project at the clinic and at home on eight different tasks: semitandem stand, functional reach, stair climb and descend, inserting a plug, looking up and dialing a telephone number, and reading. RESULTS: The correlations were good for all tasks, with coefficients ranging from .52 to .86. Those with visual impairment were slightly more likely to perform better at home compared to the clinic, although the differences were statistically significant only for the reading task. The most important predictor of performance on any task in the home was performance on the task at the clinic, even after adjusting for age, race, sex, education, and visual impairment. Educational level and visual impairment were consistent predictors of performance in the home for most tests. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that performances on standardized tasks in the clinic setting do correlate with similar tasks performed in the home, although the relationship is complicated in the presence of visual impairment.

Functional decline in older adults: expanding methods of ascertainment.

BACKGROUND: There is substantial interest in the prevention of physical disability associated with aging. However, little is known about how to screen for declining function at sufficiently early stages to prevent frank disability. This work provides an initial description and assessment of a new self-report method for measuring function in older adults which complements standard methods and may be sensitive to subtler degrees of disablement than currently employed methods. We operationalize the method and demonstrate that it identifies a meaningful number of people as potentially disabled who are not identified by standard methods; also, we evaluate the method's reliability and validity for identifying subtle functional decline relative to existing methods. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional, observational study of a volunteer population of 231 adults 59 years and older, evaluated in a multidisciplinary laboratory. Self-reported difficulty and dependency in each of 27 tasks of daily life were assessed as the measure of disability. Those without difficulty were evaluated for other functional change, by self-report, defined as either: (a) modification of method, or (b) decreased frequency of task performance, when due to health rather than change in social circumstances. Prevalence, test-retest reliability, construct, and criterion validity were evaluated. RESULTS: In a study population in which from 1% to 50% of participants reported difficulty with each of 27 tasks, from 2% to 33% reported modification of task performance while not having difficulty. Few participants reported decreased frequency without modification. Persons with task modifications, particularly in mobility tasks, showed intermediate levels of performance on objectively measured tests and an intermediate number of chronic diseases, compared to those reporting difficulty and those reporting neither difficulty nor modification. CONCLUSIONS: Cross-sectional evidence supports the ability of the proposed method to identify meaningful numbers of people with functional decline who were not identified by standard self-report methods. In some cases, these were individuals with functional losses comparable to those who did report difficulty. In other cases, these may have been individuals with earlier functional loss, perhaps representing a preclinical stage of disability. Prospective evaluation will identify whether this method predicts the onset of difficulty or disability, and whether it predicts decline with sufficient precision to identify at-risk individuals in a clinical setting.

Visual function assessment questionnaires.

With increased emphasis on functional outcomes in ophthalmology, third-party health care payers and research funding agencies have turned their attention to the development and use of visual function questionnaires. Since 1980, more than a dozen such self-report visual function questionnaires have been developed. All of these instruments include items that ask about specific daily activities; patients must respond with a rating that represents the level of difficulty that they experience with the activity described. This article reviews all of the known instruments, with special attention paid to their validity and reliability. Most validation studies have reported high response consistency across items and significant correlations of instrument scores with visual impairment measures. Only two studies have measured test-retest reliability. The developers of visual function questionnaires typically divide the items into several different subscales, suggesting that different variables are being measured. Although the items are very similar for the different instruments, there is little agreement among instruments on the definition of subscales. All instruments are scored as the average of the ordinal patient ratings across items for each subscale and/or for the total instrument. Measurement issues underlying the scoring of ordinal patient ratings are discussed. It is argued that unless the instruments can be converted to interval scales, the averaging of patient ratings does not yield true measurements. The three visual function questionnaires that were calibrated with a statistical item response model, which estimates interval scales, are reviewed. It is concluded that future research and development should devote additional attention to the measurement properties of functional assessment instruments.