1Retina Foundation of the Southwest, 9900 North Central Expressway, Suite 400, Dallas, Texas 75231, and Department of Ophthalmology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas, 5323 Harry Hines Boulevard, Dallas, Texas 75235 USA
2Texas Retina Associates, 7150 Greenville Avenue, Suite 400, Dallas, Texas 75231, and Department of Ophthalmology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas, 5323 Harry Hines Boulevard, Dallas, Texas 75235 USA
William H. Swanson and Gary E. Fish, "Color matches in diseased eyes with good acuity: detection of deficits in cone optical density and in chromatic discrimination," J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 12, 2230-2236 (1995)
Reduced foveal cone optical density in diseased eyes with normal acuity can affect color matches. Using field diameters of 1°, 2°, 4°, and 8°, we measured mean color-match midpoints and match widths in patients who had good acuity and who exhibited three categories of eye disease: hereditary macular degeneration (n = 12), retinitis pigmentosa (n = 19), and glaucoma (n = 18). Results were compared with those for normal observers of comparable ages. Mean color-match midpoints were abnormal only for the population with hereditary macular degeneration, indicating a reduction in cone optical density in the central 4°. Mean color-match widths were enlarged for both hereditary macular degeneration and retinitis pigmentosa, a result consistent with a reduction in the number of foveal cones.
You do not have subscription access to this journal. Cited by links are available to subscribers only. You may subscribe either as an Optica member, or as an authorized user of your institution.
You do not have subscription access to this journal. Figure files are available to subscribers only. You may subscribe either as an Optica member, or as an authorized user of your institution.
You do not have subscription access to this journal. Article tables are available to subscribers only. You may subscribe either as an Optica member, or as an authorized user of your institution.
Age, Acuity, Inheritance, and Peak-to-Peak Amplitude for the 30-Hz Full-Field ERG for Patients with Retinitis Pigmentosa
Observer ID No.
Age (years)
Acuity (log MAR)
Inheritance
30-Hz ERG (μV)
682
45.5
0.00
dominant
9.5
119
34.0
0.10
dominant
14.6
911
44.0
−0.02
dominant
16.5
70
43.8
0.20
dominant
17.9
908
33.3
−0.08
dominant
21.1
455
39.4
0.20
isolate
1.0
904
28.1
0.06
isolate
1.4
673
50.2
0.00
isolate
4.4
903
42.7
0.00
isolate
9.2
906
46.6
0.07
isolate
14.0
910
40.9
0.01
isolate
20.1
741
37.9
0.01
isolate
20.6
676
29.2
0.10
isolate
24.7
669
32.7
0.1
multiplex
0.2
408
30.3
0.00
recessive
0.2
672
35.7
0.00
recessive
0.5
909
34.3
0.02
recessive
1.2
902
46.5
−0.06
recessive
6.8
668
43.6
0.10
unilateral
2.8
Mean ±1 SD
38.9 ± 6.6
0.04 ± 0.08
Normal observers
38.0 ± 6.7
Table 3
Age, Acuity, Primary Treatment, IOP for Patients with Glaucoma
Observer ID No.
Age (years)
Acuity (log MAR)
Treatment
IOP (mm Hg)
694
41.4
0.00
Medications only
18
681
63.7
0.01
Medications only
19
942
65.8
−0.04
Medications only
17
693
75.4
0.11
Medications only
16
825
76.3
−0.04
Medications only
10
735
77.3
0.13
Medications only
19
708
62.0
0.03
Argon-laser trabeculoplasty
19
814
76.7
0.01
Argon-laser trabeculoplasty
18
920
78.1
0.05
Argon-laser trabeculoplasty
18
938
80.3
0.02
Argon-laser trabeculoplasty
15
734
33.3
−0.20
Trabeculectomy
12
922
47.2
0.00
Trabeculectomy
11
648
54.7
0.11
Trabeculectomy
10
679
61.2
0.01
Trabeculectomy
12
674
70.6
0.00
Trabeculectomy
8
692
72.9
0.10
Trabeculectomy
11
270
76.1
0.00
Trabeculectomy
12
283
78.1
0.05
Trabeculectomy
10
Mean ±1 SD
66.2 ± 13.9
0.02 ± 0.07
Normal observers
65.4 ± 11.2
Table 4
Results of ANOVA of Match-Midpoint-Deficit Scores for the Three Patient Groupsa
Source
df
SS
MS
F
P
ɛ
P*
Disease
2
0.2217
0.11084
3.940
0.026
Error
46
1.294
0.02813
Diameter
3
0.0056
0.00185
1.278
0.284
0.864
0.284
Disease × diameter
6
0.0468
0.00780
5.382
<0.0005
0.864
<0.0005
Error
138
0.2001
0.00145
Total
195
1.7349
df, Degrees of freedom; SS, sum of squares; MS, mean square; F, ratio; P, probability; ɛ, sphericity index; P*, the P value corrected for violation of the assumption of sphericity.
Table 5
Results of ANOVA of Match-Width-Deficit Scores for the Three Patient Groupsa
Source
df
SS
MS
F
P
ɛ
P*
Disease
2
14.3344
7.16722
19.971
<0.0005
Error
46
16.5083
0.35888
Diameter
3
0.1430
0.04768
0.333
0.801
0.670
0.718
Disease × diameter
6
1.0529
0.17549
1.227
0.296
0.670
0.305
Error
138
19.7328
0.14299
Total
195
50.5719
df, Degrees of freedom; SS, sum of squares; MS, mean square; F, ratio; P, probability; ɛ, sphericity index; P*, the P value corrected for violation of the assumption of sphericity.
Tables (5)
Table 1
Age and Acuity for Patients with Hereditary Macular Degeneration
Age, Acuity, Inheritance, and Peak-to-Peak Amplitude for the 30-Hz Full-Field ERG for Patients with Retinitis Pigmentosa
Observer ID No.
Age (years)
Acuity (log MAR)
Inheritance
30-Hz ERG (μV)
682
45.5
0.00
dominant
9.5
119
34.0
0.10
dominant
14.6
911
44.0
−0.02
dominant
16.5
70
43.8
0.20
dominant
17.9
908
33.3
−0.08
dominant
21.1
455
39.4
0.20
isolate
1.0
904
28.1
0.06
isolate
1.4
673
50.2
0.00
isolate
4.4
903
42.7
0.00
isolate
9.2
906
46.6
0.07
isolate
14.0
910
40.9
0.01
isolate
20.1
741
37.9
0.01
isolate
20.6
676
29.2
0.10
isolate
24.7
669
32.7
0.1
multiplex
0.2
408
30.3
0.00
recessive
0.2
672
35.7
0.00
recessive
0.5
909
34.3
0.02
recessive
1.2
902
46.5
−0.06
recessive
6.8
668
43.6
0.10
unilateral
2.8
Mean ±1 SD
38.9 ± 6.6
0.04 ± 0.08
Normal observers
38.0 ± 6.7
Table 3
Age, Acuity, Primary Treatment, IOP for Patients with Glaucoma
Observer ID No.
Age (years)
Acuity (log MAR)
Treatment
IOP (mm Hg)
694
41.4
0.00
Medications only
18
681
63.7
0.01
Medications only
19
942
65.8
−0.04
Medications only
17
693
75.4
0.11
Medications only
16
825
76.3
−0.04
Medications only
10
735
77.3
0.13
Medications only
19
708
62.0
0.03
Argon-laser trabeculoplasty
19
814
76.7
0.01
Argon-laser trabeculoplasty
18
920
78.1
0.05
Argon-laser trabeculoplasty
18
938
80.3
0.02
Argon-laser trabeculoplasty
15
734
33.3
−0.20
Trabeculectomy
12
922
47.2
0.00
Trabeculectomy
11
648
54.7
0.11
Trabeculectomy
10
679
61.2
0.01
Trabeculectomy
12
674
70.6
0.00
Trabeculectomy
8
692
72.9
0.10
Trabeculectomy
11
270
76.1
0.00
Trabeculectomy
12
283
78.1
0.05
Trabeculectomy
10
Mean ±1 SD
66.2 ± 13.9
0.02 ± 0.07
Normal observers
65.4 ± 11.2
Table 4
Results of ANOVA of Match-Midpoint-Deficit Scores for the Three Patient Groupsa
Source
df
SS
MS
F
P
ɛ
P*
Disease
2
0.2217
0.11084
3.940
0.026
Error
46
1.294
0.02813
Diameter
3
0.0056
0.00185
1.278
0.284
0.864
0.284
Disease × diameter
6
0.0468
0.00780
5.382
<0.0005
0.864
<0.0005
Error
138
0.2001
0.00145
Total
195
1.7349
df, Degrees of freedom; SS, sum of squares; MS, mean square; F, ratio; P, probability; ɛ, sphericity index; P*, the P value corrected for violation of the assumption of sphericity.
Table 5
Results of ANOVA of Match-Width-Deficit Scores for the Three Patient Groupsa
Source
df
SS
MS
F
P
ɛ
P*
Disease
2
14.3344
7.16722
19.971
<0.0005
Error
46
16.5083
0.35888
Diameter
3
0.1430
0.04768
0.333
0.801
0.670
0.718
Disease × diameter
6
1.0529
0.17549
1.227
0.296
0.670
0.305
Error
138
19.7328
0.14299
Total
195
50.5719
df, Degrees of freedom; SS, sum of squares; MS, mean square; F, ratio; P, probability; ɛ, sphericity index; P*, the P value corrected for violation of the assumption of sphericity.
Add to BibSonomy