Visual function and subjective quality of life compared in subjects with acquired macular disease.

PURPOSE: To determine the objective measures of visual function that are most relevant to subjective quality of vision and perceived reading ability in patients with acquired macular disease. METHODS: Twenty-eight patients with macular disease underwent a comprehensive assessment of visual function. The patients also completed a vision-related quality-of-life questionnaire that included a section of general questions about perceived visual performance and a section with specific questions on reading. RESULTS: Results of all tests of vision correlated highly with reported vision-related quality-of-life impairment. Low-contrast tests explained most of the variance in self-reported problems with reading. Text-reading speed correlated highly with overall concern about vision. CONCLUSIONS: Reading performance is strongly associated with vision-related quality of life. High-contrast distance acuity is not the only relevant measure of visual function in relation to the perceived visual performance of a patient with macular disease. The results suggest the importance of print contrast, even over print size, in reading performance in patients with acquired macular disease.

Reading with eccentric fixation is faster in inferior visual field than in left visual field.

PURPOSE: People with central field loss tend to fixate so that information falls in the inferior or left visual field. Studies of reading from a page of text suggest that using inferior field is advantageous relative to using left visual field. In this study, we investigated whether reading without eye movements in normal peripheral vision is better when text is presented in inferior or left visual field. METHODS: Reading rates were determined for retinally stabilized rapid serial visual presentation sentences of seven letter sizes, presented at 5 degrees in inferior and left visual field of six normal observers. RESULTS: When print size is appropriately magnified for peripheral viewing, reading speed in inferior field is faster than in left visual field. There is no significant difference between inferior and left visual field in the print size required to reach maximum reading speed. CONCLUSIONS: For reading tasks not involving eye movements, there is an advantage in eccentrically fixating such that text falls in inferior rather than left visual field.

Are the benefits of sentence context different in central and peripheral vision?

BACKGROUND: Sentence context increases reading speed relative to reading unrelated words. Previous studies of normal peripheral retina and in patients with central field loss (CFL) have come to different conclusions regarding the benefits of sentence context for reading in peripheral retina. Studies of normal peripheral vision presented the text to inferior visual field; it is presumed that most of the patients fixated using retina lateral to their scotoma. The goal of the current study was to determine whether the location of the text on the retina interacts with the usefulness of sentence context. METHODS: Normally sighted subjects read sentences and random lists of words presented at the fovea and at 50 to the left of and 50 inferior to fixation in visual field space. Texts were presented using rapid serial visual presentation (RSVP). RESULTS: The ratio of reading rates for sentences to random words (context gain) was the same in the inferior field (2.7 +/- 0.20) and at the fovea (2.6 +/- 0.26); context gain was greater in the left field (7.2 +/- 1.22). CONCLUSIONS: Sentence context increases reading speed regardless of the position of the text on the retina. Reading rates in peripheral retina are not decreased because of an inability to use sentence context.