{"title":"Validation of a self-administered Home ETDRS visual acuity testing (H-ETDRS) for self-monitoring vision changes in retinal diseases.","authors":"Zitian Liu,Yanjing Huang,Ling Jin,Caineng Pan,Xiaotong Han,Yingfeng Zheng","doi":"10.1136/bjo-2024-326283","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"OBJECTIVE\r\nTo validate a self-administered Home Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (H-ETDRS) visual acuity (VA) test and to assess its accuracy in detecting VA decline in patients with retinal diseases.\r\n\r\nMETHODS\r\nA validation group of 156 participants and a testing group of 100 participants with diabetic retinopathy and age-related macular degeneration were recruited. All participants underwent monocular distance best-corrected VA (BCVA) tests in the study eye using the standard ETDRS (S-ETDRS) charts in clinic and the H-ETDRS device in a simulated home setting. Participants in the validation group repeated both methods. H-ETDRS letter scores were compared with S-ETDRS scores, evaluating mean difference and test-retest reliability (TRR). Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were calculated to measure the agreement. Participants in the testing group repeated both methods with a Bangerter filter density of 0.6 to simulate BCVA change. The performance of H-ETDRS in detecting acuity change was evaluated, with S-ETDRS serving as the standard.\r\n\r\nRESULTS\r\nFor the validation group, the mean difference between S-ETDRS and H-ETDRS scores was -1.38 letters (95% limits of agreement (LOA) -6.99 to 4.22). The scores of the two tests were highly correlated with an ICC of 0.98. The mean differences between initial test and retest scores were 0.11 letters (95% LOA -2.62 to 2.84) for S-ETDRS and -0.13 letters (95% LOA -5.64 to 5.38) for H-ETDRS. The ICCs of test-retest letter scores were 1.00 for S-ETDRS and 0.98 for H-ETDRS. For participants in the testing group who showed BCVA decline of one line or more with Bangerter filter, 96.7% were able to detect VA changes using H-ETDRS.\r\n\r\nCONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE\r\nThe H-ETDRS test demonstrates high TRR and good concordance with S-ETDRS test for retinal patients. The H-ETDRS is viable for self-monitoring VA changes in retinal diseases, however, further validation studies in actual home settings are warranted.","PeriodicalId":9313,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of Ophthalmology","volume":"26 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of Ophthalmology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bjo-2024-326283","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
OBJECTIVE
To validate a self-administered Home Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (H-ETDRS) visual acuity (VA) test and to assess its accuracy in detecting VA decline in patients with retinal diseases.
METHODS
A validation group of 156 participants and a testing group of 100 participants with diabetic retinopathy and age-related macular degeneration were recruited. All participants underwent monocular distance best-corrected VA (BCVA) tests in the study eye using the standard ETDRS (S-ETDRS) charts in clinic and the H-ETDRS device in a simulated home setting. Participants in the validation group repeated both methods. H-ETDRS letter scores were compared with S-ETDRS scores, evaluating mean difference and test-retest reliability (TRR). Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were calculated to measure the agreement. Participants in the testing group repeated both methods with a Bangerter filter density of 0.6 to simulate BCVA change. The performance of H-ETDRS in detecting acuity change was evaluated, with S-ETDRS serving as the standard.
RESULTS
For the validation group, the mean difference between S-ETDRS and H-ETDRS scores was -1.38 letters (95% limits of agreement (LOA) -6.99 to 4.22). The scores of the two tests were highly correlated with an ICC of 0.98. The mean differences between initial test and retest scores were 0.11 letters (95% LOA -2.62 to 2.84) for S-ETDRS and -0.13 letters (95% LOA -5.64 to 5.38) for H-ETDRS. The ICCs of test-retest letter scores were 1.00 for S-ETDRS and 0.98 for H-ETDRS. For participants in the testing group who showed BCVA decline of one line or more with Bangerter filter, 96.7% were able to detect VA changes using H-ETDRS.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
The H-ETDRS test demonstrates high TRR and good concordance with S-ETDRS test for retinal patients. The H-ETDRS is viable for self-monitoring VA changes in retinal diseases, however, further validation studies in actual home settings are warranted.
期刊介绍:
The British Journal of Ophthalmology (BJO) is an international peer-reviewed journal for ophthalmologists and visual science specialists. BJO publishes clinical investigations, clinical observations, and clinically relevant laboratory investigations related to ophthalmology. It also provides major reviews and also publishes manuscripts covering regional issues in a global context.