Visual performance requirements for post-PRK police recruits

Low luminance visual acuity as a clinical measure and clinical trial outcome measure: a scoping review

PURPOSE

The measurement of standard visual acuity (VA) is the most well-known part of any ophthalmic examination to indicate visual function. Despite this, it is insensitive in detecting early disease changes. Therefore, other visual function tests have been developed including low luminance VA (LLVA) and low luminance deficit (LLD). This scoping literature review aims to summarise the current published applications of LLVA and LLD assessments to evaluate their utility as clinical markers and research outcome measures in a variety of ophthalmic conditions.

RECENT FINDINGS

Sixty-five peer-reviewed publications were included. LLVA was pioneered for use in geographic atrophy, a subtype of age-related macular degeneration, which remains the mainstay of its clinical application. However, other studies have reported additional useful applications in inherited retinal diseases including rare maculopathies and rod-cone dystrophies. Although there are some variations in testing methodology, use of the standard Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart with a 2.0 log unit neutral density filter is the most popular approach. The optimal testing luminance is still to be defined.

SUMMARY

Overall, LLVA is an earlier clinical marker of change in central retinal function than standard VA. It has been shown to be a risk factor for disease progression and a better indicator of a patient's level of everyday visual function. It is inexpensive and simple to implement using readily available standard ophthalmic equipment.

Visual function of police officers who have undergone refractive surgery

INTRODUCTION

The visual acuity and contrast sensitivity of police recruits and officers was evaluated in both normal and dim illumination conditions to determine whether officers who have had refractive surgery have compromised night vision.

METHODS

The control group consisted of 76 officers and recruits who have not had refractive surgery and the refractive surgery group consisted of 22 officers and recruits who had refractive surgery. Visual acuity and contrast sensitivity were measured under both room illumination and dim illumination. The room illumination test series included high contrast acuity, low contrast acuity and Pelli-Robson contrast sensitivity. The dim illumination test series included high contrast acuity, low contrast acuity, Pelli-Robson contrast sensitivity, license plate number acuity (with and without glare) and the Mesotest.

RESULTS

The general findings were that the refractive surgery group had lower acuity scores on low contrast targets in both room and dim light levels along with a reduction in the Mesotest scores with a glare source compared to the control group.

CONCLUSIONS

Although refractive surgery police recruits and officers had reduced performance on some vision tests, these reductions were small and it is unlikely that their performance on vision related tasks would be compromised, on average. The major concern is the small number of refractive surgery candidates whose results were well outside the range of the non-surgical candidates. Their vision may be unacceptable for policing.