Next Article in Journal
The Effect of Polyscias filicifolia Bailey Biomass Tincture on the Protein Synthesis Process in the Heterogeneous System From the Isolated Pig Heart
Previous Article in Journal
Prognosis of In-Hospital Myocardial Infarction Course for Diabetic and Nondiabetic Patients Using a Noninvasive Evaluation of Hemodynamics and Heart Rate Variability
Medicina is published by MDPI from Volume 54 Issue 1 (2018). Articles in this Issue were published by another publisher in Open Access under a CC-BY (or CC-BY-NC-ND) licence. Articles are hosted by MDPI on mdpi.com as a courtesy and upon agreement with Lithuanian Medical Association, Lithuanian University of Health Sciences, and Vilnius University.
Open AccessArticle

Associations Between Contrast Sensitivity and Aging

1
Department of Ophthalmology, Medical Academy, Lithuanian University of Health Sciences
2
Neuroscience Institute, Medical Academy, Lithuanian University of Health Sciences
3
Maxpharma Baltija UAB, Lithuania
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Medicina 2013, 49(6), 43; https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina49060043
Received: 21 February 2012 / Accepted: 30 May 2013 / Published: 4 June 2013
Objective. The aim of this study was to assess age-related visual functions (visual acuity and contrast sensitivity) and compare the results by different age groups.
Material and Methods. A total of 231 patients were examined. The patients were divided into 5 age groups: 10 patients in group 1, 30–39 years; 40 patients in the group 2, 40–49 years; 77 patients in the group 3, 50–59 years; 71 patients in the group 4, 60–70 years; and 33 patients in the group 5, 71–85 years. A typical Snellen’s chart (the direction of the gap in Landolt C) was used for noncorrected and best-corrected visual acuity testing. Contrast sensitivity was evaluated by employing a Ginsburg Box, VSCR-CST-6500.
Results. Noncorrected visual acuity was significantly better in the group 2 than the group 3 (0.86 [0.28] vs. 0.69 [0.33], P=0.018). Moreover, noncorrected and best-corrected visual acuity was significantly better in the group 4 than the group 5 (0.52 [0.35] vs. 0.35 [0.28], P<0.001; and 0.9 [0.21] vs. 0.69 [0.27], P<0.005, respectively). Contrast sensitivity at the nighttime without glare was significantly worse in the group 2 than the group 1 at the spatial frequencies of 3, 12, and 18 cycles per degree (P=0.001, P=0.05, and P=0.01, respectively). The patients in the group 2 had significantly worse contrast sensitivity at the nighttime and daytime with glare at the spatial frequencies of 1.5, 12, and 18 cycles per degree (P=0.054, P=0.04, and P=0.01 and P=0.011, P=0.031, and P=0.011, respectively). The greatest differences in contrast sensitivity were observed between the groups 4 and 5, and it was 2 to 4 times better in the group 4. Comparing these groups, all the differences at the nighttime and daytime with and without glare were significant.
Conclusions
. Contrast sensitivity was worst among the oldest persons (71–85 years), and it began to worsen already in the persons aged 40–49 years. Contrast sensitivity was very similar in the age groups of 40–49 and 50–59 years.
Keywords: contrast sensitivity; visual acuity; aging; functional acuity contrast test contrast sensitivity; visual acuity; aging; functional acuity contrast test
MDPI and ACS Style

Liutkevičienė, R.; Čebatorienė, D.; Liutkevičienė, G.; Jašinskas, V.; Žaliūnienė, D. Associations Between Contrast Sensitivity and Aging. Medicina 2013, 49, 43.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Only visits after 24 November 2015 are recorded.
Back to TopTop