Visual function assessment of diagnostic radiography students

Journal article


Lockwood, P. and Blackman, A. 2019. Visual function assessment of diagnostic radiography students. Radiography. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radi.2019.10.012
AuthorsLockwood, P. and Blackman, A.
Abstract

Introduction: Deterioration of visual acuity (VA) and visual impairment has been linked to age-related subtle changes, gender, and a correlation to socioeconomic status. This study aimed to assess first-year diagnostic radiography students’ visual functional abilities by applying the International Classification of Impairments, Disabilities and Handicaps (ICIDH) recommendations of functional VA screening and health-related quality of life questionnaire (HRQOL).

Methods: The design followed the World Health Organisation (WHO) electronic VA testing of monocular sight using LogMAR charts and binocular vision using Snellen charts, and an HRQOL questionnaire assessing for reduced ability of visual-based tasks in activities of daily living (ADL). The data was evaluated in correlation to the participant’s visual correction, age, gender, and socioeconomic background.

Results: Seventy students were recruited, all meeting the WHO standard level for visual ability, with 100% (n=70/70) met or achieved above normal binocular vision, correlating to expected normal population results from published studies for age. The monocular vision demonstrated 74% (n=52/70) for the right eye, and 80% (n=56/70) for the left eye for normal vision levels. The results did not differ significantly between each eye (p=0.21), gender variations between the left eye (p=0.27) and the right eye (p=0.10) results were affected by sample ratio of females (80%; n=56/70) to males (20%; n=14/70), the visual correction did not impair binocular VA. The HRQOL assessment indicated no significant functional VA issues in the study sample. The study demonstrated no association between the participant’s socioeconomic background that may influence their VA ability.

Conclusion: The results provided normative binocular and monocular data on visual function in a sample of student radiographers and indicated that their thresholds align to normal (or near-normal) VA standards.

Implications for practice: The visual health data was reviewed for subgroup comparison and trend analysis, and did not identify risk factors within this sample group that their VA and visual functioning would impact upon radiography clinical placement tasks and activities. The sample is not generalisable to the wider population; further studies are recommended.

KeywordsVisual Acuity; visual Function; vision Screening; radiography
Year2019
JournalRadiography
PublisherElsevier
ISSN1078-8174
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radi.2019.10.012
Official URLhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.radi.2019.10.012
Related URLhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/
Publication dates
Online26 Nov 2019
Publication process dates
Accepted29 Oct 2019
Deposited03 Dec 2019
Accepted author manuscript
License
File Access Level
Open
Output statusPublished
References

1. National Health Service. Colour vision deficiency (Colour blindness). Available at: https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/colour-vision-deficiency/(Accessed 17th Sept 2019).
2. National Institutes of Health and National Eye Institute. Eye Conditions and Diseases: Color Blindness. July 2019. Available at: https://nei.nih.gov/learn-about-eye-health/eye-conditions-and-diseas... (Accessed 17th Sept 2019).
3. Spalding JA. Colour vision deficiency in the medical profession. Br J Gen Pract 1999; 1;49(443):469-75.
4. Hess RF, To L, Zhou J, Wang G, Cooperstock JR. Stereo vision: the haves and have-nots. i-Perception. 2015 Jul 30;6(3):2041669515593028. Available at: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/2041669515593028 (Accessed 17th Sept 2019).
5. Wajuihian SO, Hansraj R. Stereoacuity and refractive, accommodative and vergence anomalies of South African school children, aged 13–18 years. African Vision and Eye Health. 2018 Feb 26;77(1):1-8. Available at: https://avehjournal.org/index.php/aveh/article/view/400/782 (Accessed 17th Sept 2019).
6. Miller LJ, Mittenberg W, Carey VM, McMorrow MA, Kushner TE, Weinstein JM. Stereopsis caused by traumatic brain injury. Arch Clin Neuropsych 1999;1;14(6):537-43.
7. Elliott DB, Yang KC, Whitaker D. Visual acuity changes throughout adulthood in normal, healthy eyes: seeing beyond 6/6. Optometry and vision science: official publication of the American Academy of Optometry 1995;72(3):186-91.
8. Haegerstrom-Portnoy G, Schneck ME, Brabyn JA. Seeing into old age: vision function beyond acuity. Optometry Vision Sci 1999;1;76(3):141-58.
9. The Society and College of Radiographers. Work related musculo-skeletal disorders. The Society and College of Radiographers London 2014. Available at: https://www.sor.org/learning/document-library/work-related-musculo-s... (Accessed 24th June 2019).
10. Taylor HR, Livingston PM, Stanislavsky YL, McCarty CA. Visual impairment in Australia: distance visual acuity, near vision, and visual field findings of the Melbourne Visual Impairment Project. Am J Ophthalmol 1997;1;123(3):328-37.
11. Yip JL, Luben R, Hayat S, Khawaja AP, Broadway DC, Wareham N, Khaw KT, Foster PJ. Area deprivation, individual socioeconomic status and low vision in the EPIC-Norfolk Eye Study. J Epidemiol Community Health 2014;1;68(3):204-10.
12. Manning D, Barker-Mill SC, Donovan T, Crawford T. Time-dependent observer errors in pulmonary nodule detection. Br J Radiol 2006;79(940):342-346.
13. Christensen EE, Dietz GW, Murry RC, Moore JG. The effect of fatigue on resident performance. Radiology 1977;125(1):103-105.
14. Vertinsky T, Forster B. Prevalence of eye strain among radiologists: influence of viewing variables on symptoms. Am J Roentgenol 2005;184:681–6.
15. Halpenny D, O'Driscoll D, Torreggiani WC. Ocular health among radiologists in the age of PACS: is it time for our profession to open its eyes to this issue in light of existing European legislation?. Br J Radiol 2012;85(1020):e1309-11.
16. Krupinski EA. The role of perception in imaging: past and future. InSeminars in nucl med 2011;1 (41; 6)392-400.
17. Universities and Colleges Admissions Service 2017. Search for courses website. Available at: http://search.ucas.com/search/providers?Vac=1&AvailableIn=2017&a... (Accessed 6th June 2017).
18. NHS Employers. Criminal Record Checks Standard. NHS Employers 2019. Available at: https://www.nhsemployers.org/-/media/Employers/Publications/employme... (Accessed 24th June 2019).
19. Police Act 1997 (Criminal Records) (Amendment) Regulations 2013. Available at: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2013/1194/pdfs/uksi_20131194_en.p... (Accessed 24th June 2019).
20. NHS Employers. Values based recruitment. NHS Employers 2019. Available at: https://www.nhsemployers.org/your-workforce/recruit/employer-led-rec... (Accessed 24th June 2019)
21. Health Education England. Values based recruitment 2017. Available at: https://www.hee.nhs.uk/printpdf/our-work/attracting-recruiting/value... (Accessed 6th June 2017).
22. The Scottish Government. Everyone Matters: 2020 Workforce Vision implementation Plan 2016-17. Available at: http://www.gov.scot/Resource/0049/00490303.pdf (Accessed 6th June 2017).
23. NHS Wales. Values Based Recruitment – A Framework for Higher Education Institutions (HEI) 2017. Available at: http://www.weds.wales.nhs.uk/sitesplus/documents/1076/vbr%20framewor... (Accessed 6th June 2017).
24. The Mid Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust Public inquiry: Final report 2015. Available at: http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20150407084003/http://www.midstaffspublicinquiry.com/report (Accessed 24th June 2019).
25. NHS England. Keogh, B: Review into the quality of care and treatment provided by 14 hospital trusts in England: overview report 2013. Available at: https://www.nhs.uk/NHSEngland/bruce-keogh-review/Documents/outcomes/... (Accessed 24th June 2019).
26. Health Professions Admission Test- Ulster. Available at: https://hpat-ulster.acer.org/about-hpat-ulster (Accessed 24th June 2019).
27. Teesside University, Diagnostic Radiography Admissions Test. Available at: http://www.tees.ac.uk/docs/DocRepo/Courses/Radiography_sample.pdf (Accessed 24th June 2019).
28. The Royal College of Ophthalmologists. Ophthalmic services guidance: occupational visual standards. 2013. Available at: http://bmec.swbh.nhs.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/OCCUPATIONAL-VISU... (Accessed 24th June 2019).
29. Health and Safety (Working with Display Screen Equipment) Regulations 1992 INDG36(rev4), HMSO, London 2013. Available at: http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/indg36.pdf (Accessed 24th June 2019).
30. World Health Organisation. International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF).Geneva: WHO 2013. Available at: https://www.who.int/classifications/icf/en/ (Accessed 24th June 2019).
31. Colenbrander A. Measuring vision and vision loss. Chapter 51, volume 5. In: Duane TD, Tasman W, Jaeger EA. Duane’s clinical ophthalmology, Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2001, p.1-39.
32. National Eye Institute. Visual Functioning Questionnaire- 25 (VFQ-25) Version 2000. Available at: https://nei.nih.gov/sites/default/files/nei-pdfs/vfq_sa.pdf (Accessed 24th June 2019).
33. Mangione CM, Lee PP, Gutierrez PR, Spritzer K, Berry S, Hays RD. Development of the 25-item National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire. Arch Ophthalmol 2001; 119:1050-1058.
34. World Health Organisation. Prevention of Blindness and Deafness: Consultation on development of standards for characterization of vision loss and visual functioning. WHO/PBL/03.91. 2003. Available at: http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/68601/1/WHO_PBL_03.91.pdf (Accessed 24th June 2019).
35. Kay S, Ferreira A. Mapping the 25-item National Eye Institute visual functioning questionnaire (NEI VFQ-25) to EQ-5D utility scores. Ophthalmic Epidemiol 2014; 1;21(2):66-78.
36. Kind P, Dolan P, Gudex C, Williams A. Variations in population health status: results from a United Kingdom national questionnaire survey. BMJ 1998;316(7133):736-41.
37. Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government. English Indices of Deprivation 2015 (LSOA). Available at: http://imd-by-postcode.opendatacommunities.org/ (Accessed 24th June 2019).
38. Ehrmann K, Fedtke C, Radić A. Assessment of computer generated vision charts. Contact Lens and Anterio 2009;1;32(3):133-40.
39. The Royal College of Ophthalmologists. Snellen and LogMAR acuity testing. 2015. Available at: https://www.rcophth.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/LogMAR-vs-Snell... (Accessed 24th June 2019).
40. Bailey IL, Lovie JE. New design principles for visual acuity letter charts. Am J Optom Phys Opt 1976;53(11):740-5.
41. World Health Organisation. Standards for Characterization of Vision Loss and Visual Functioning, WHO/PBL/03.91 2003. Available at: https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/68601/WHO_PBL_03.91... (Accessed 24th June 2019).
42. Holladay JT. Proper method for calculating average visual acuity. J Refract Surg 1997;1;13(4):388-91.
43. International Council of Ophthalmology. Visual Acuity Measurement Standard 1988. Available at: http://www.icoph.org/dynamic/attachments/resources/icovisualacuity19... (Accessed 24th June 2019).
44. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Health and social care directorate, Quality standards and indicators, Briefing paper: Serious Eye Disorders 2018. Available at: https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/qs180/documents/briefing-paper (Accessed 24th June 2019).
45. British Standards Institution. Visual acuity test types. Test charts for clinical determination of distance visual acuity. Specification 4274-1:2003. Available at: https://shop.bsigroup.com/ProductDetail/?pid=000000000030021439&... (Accessed 24th June 2019).
46. Whatham AR, Mermoud C, Deruaz A, Goldschmidt M, Zesiger P, Safran AB. Computer-based measurement of letter and word acuity. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 2006; 26(2):156–168.
47. Rosser DA, Murdoch IE, Fitzke FW, Laidlaw DA. Improving on ETDRS acuities: design and results for a computerised thresholding device. Eye 2003:17(6):701–706.
48. Pelli DG, Bex P. Measuring Contrast Sensitivity. Vision Res 2013;90:10–14.
49. Hirschorn, D S. Krupinski, EA. Flynn, MJ. IT reference guide for the practicing radiologist. The American College of Radiology. 2013. Available at: https://www.acr.org/~/media/ACR/Documents/PDF/Advocacy/IT%20Referenc... (Accessed 6th June 2017).
50. The Royal College of Radiologists, IT clinical documents: Picture archiving and communications systems (PACS) and guidelines on diagnostic devices. Second edition 2012. Available at: https://www.rcr.ac.uk/sites/default/files/docs/radiology/pdf/BFCR%28... (Accessed 24th June 2019).
51. Hood DC, Finkelstein MA. Sensitivity to light. In: Boff K, Kaufman L, Thomas J, editors. Handbook of Perception and Human Performance: Vol 1. Sensory Processes and Perception, New York: Wiley, 1986.
52. Brennan PC, McEntee M, Evanoff M, Phillips P, O'Connor WT, Manning DJ. Ambient lighting: effect of illumination on soft-copy viewing of radiographs of the wrist. Am J Roentgenol 2007;188(2):177-80.
53. Royal College of Radiologists. Picture archiving and communication systems (PACS) and guidelines on diagnostic display devices. 2012. London, UK.
54. Tidbury LP, Czanner G, Newsham D. Fiat Lux: the effect of illuminance on acuity testing. Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology. 2016 Jun 1;254(6):1091-7. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4884565/
55. British Standards Institute (2011) BS EN 12464–1:2011 < br />Light and Lighting—lighting of work places < br />Part 1: indoor work places. BS EN 12464–1:2011
56. Hair JF, Black WC, Babin BJ, Anderson RE. Multivariate Data Analysis. 7th ed. Harlow: Pearson New International; 2009.
57. Sivaprasad S, Tschosik E, Kapre A, Varma R, Bressler NM, Kimel M, Dolan C, Silverman D. Reliability and Construct Validity of the NEI VFQ-25 in a Subset of Patients With Geographic Atrophy From the Phase 2 Mahalo Study. Am J Ophthalmol 2018:1;190:1-8.
58. Kovac B, Vukosavljevic M, Kovac JD, Resan M, Trajkovic G, Jankovic J, Smiljanic M, Grgurevic A. Validation and cross-cultural adaptation of the National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire (NEI VFQ-25) in Serbian patients. Health Qual Life Out 2015;3(1):142.
59. Donders FC, Moore WD. On the anomalies of accommodation and refraction of the eye: With a preliminary essay on physiological dioptrics. New Sydenham Society 1864;22.
60. Lanca C, Lanca L, Thompson J, Hogg P. Visual function assessment in medical imaging research. Radiography. University of Salford 2014; Available at: http://usir.salford.ac.uk/id/eprint/36948/3/RADT_ND_VisualFunctionPR...[1].pdf:public (Accessed 17th Sept 2019).
61. Safdar NM, Siddiqui KM, Qureshi F, Mirza MK, Knight N, Nagy P, Siegel E. Vision and quality in the digital imaging environment: how much does the visual acuity of radiologists vary at an intermediate distance? Am J Roentgenol 2009;192:335–40.
62. Equality Act 2010. Available at: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/contents (Accessed 24th June 2019).
63. Wong NW, Stokes J, Foss AJ, McGraw PV. Should there be a visual standard for ophthalmologists and other surgeons?. Postgrad Med J 2010;1;86(1016):354-8.
64. Elliot A. Is stereopsis essential to be a competent ophthalmic surgeon? Royal College of Ophthalmologists: London, 2008.
65. Birkelo CC, Chamberlain WE, Phelps PS. Tuberculosis case finding. A comparison of the effectiveness of various roentgenographic and photofluorographic methods. JAMA 1947;133:359-366.
66. Garland LH. On the scientific evaluation of diagnostic procedures. Radiology 1949;52:309-328.
67. Newell RR, Chamberlain WE, Rigler L: Descriptive classification of pulmonary shadows; a revelation of unreliability in the roentgenographic diagnosis of tuberculosis. Am Rev Tuberc 1954;69:566-584.
68. Tuddenham WJ, Calvert WP. Visual search patterns in roentgen diagnosis. Radiology 1961;76:255-256.
69. Kundel HL, Nodine CF, Carmody D. Visual scanning, pattern recognition and decision-making in pulmonary nodule detection. Invest Radiol 1978;13:175-181.
70. Nodine CF, Kundel HL. Using eye movements to study visual search and to improve tumor detection. Radiographics 1987;7:1241-1250.
71. Krupinski EA. The importance of perception research in medical imaging. Radiat Med 2000;18(6):329-34.
72. Nocum DJ, Brennan PC, Huang RT, Reed WM. The effect of abnormality-prevalence expectation on naïve observer performance and visual search. Radiography. 2013;19(3):196-9. Available at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1078817413000448 (Accessed 17th Sept 2019).
73. Quaghebeur G, Bhattacharya JJ, Murfitt J. Radiologists and visual acuity. Eur Radiol 1997;7:41–3.
74. Thompson JD, Lança C, Lança L, Hogg P. A method to determine the impact of reduced visual function on nodule detection performance. Radiography. 2017 Feb 1;23(1):19-24. Available at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1078817416300463 (Accessed 17th Sept 2019).
75. Thian YL, Li Y, Jagmohan P, Sia D, Chan VE, Tan RT. Convolutional Neural Networks for Automated Fracture Detection and Localization on Wrist Radiographs. Radiol: Artif Intell 2019;30;1(1):e180001.
76. Liu K, Li Q, Ma J, Zhou Z, Sun M, Deng Y, Tu W, Wang Y, Fan L, Xia C, Xiao Y. Evaluating a Fully Automated Pulmonary Nodule Detection Approach and Its Impact on Radiologist Performance. Radiol: Artif Intell 2019;1(3):e180084.
77. Taylor P, Given-Wilson RM. Evaluation of computer-aided detection (CAD) devices. Br J Radiol 2005;78(suppl_1):S26-30.
78. Council of the European Union (1990) Council Directive 90/270/EEC of 29 May 1990 on the minimum safety and health requirements for work with display screen equipment (fifth individual Directive within the meaning of Article 16 (1) of Directive 89/391/EEC). Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities. 1990 Available at: https://osha.europa.eu/en/legislation/directives/5 (Accessed 24th June 2019).
79. Mathew JA, Shah SA, Simon JW. Varying difficulty of Snellen letters and common errors in amblyopic and fellow eyes. Arch Ophthalmol 2011;129(2):184-7.

Permalink -

https://repository.canterbury.ac.uk/item/8q0v8/visual-function-assessment-of-diagnostic-radiography-students

Restricted files

Accepted author manuscript

  • 46
    total views
  • 0
    total downloads
  • 3
    views this month
  • 0
    downloads this month

Export as

Related outputs

Multi-professional image interpretation: performance in preliminary clinical evaluation of appendicular radiographs
Lockwood, P. and Pittock, L. 2019. Multi-professional image interpretation: performance in preliminary clinical evaluation of appendicular radiographs. Radiography. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radi.2019.04.013
Computed tomography head and facial bones review of a 2,700 year old Egyptian mummy
Lockwood, P., Elliott, J., Nelson, A. and Harris, S. 2019. Computed tomography head and facial bones review of a 2,700 year old Egyptian mummy . BJR Case Reports. https://doi.org/10.1259/bjrcr.20190076
An evaluation of CT head reporting radiographers' scope of practice within the United Kingdom
Lockwood, P. 2019. An evaluation of CT head reporting radiographers' scope of practice within the United Kingdom. Radiography. 26 (2), pp. 102-109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radi.2019.09.001
Image Interpretation by radiographers in brain, spine and knee MRI examinations: Findings from an accredited postgraduate module
Lockwood, P. and Dolbear, G. 2018. Image Interpretation by radiographers in brain, spine and knee MRI examinations: Findings from an accredited postgraduate module. Radiography. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radi.2018.05.009
Evaluation of an equilibrium phase free-breathing dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI prototype sequence compared to traditional breath-held MRI acquisition in liver oncology patients
Hopkinson, G., Lockwood, P. and Dolbear, G. 2018. Evaluation of an equilibrium phase free-breathing dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI prototype sequence compared to traditional breath-held MRI acquisition in liver oncology patients. Radiography. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radi.2018.01.001
Nuclear medicine image interpretation by radiographers: findings of an accredited postgraduate module
Lockwood, P. and Dolbear, G. 2018. Nuclear medicine image interpretation by radiographers: findings of an accredited postgraduate module. Radiography. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radi.2018.11.007
CT Sinus and facial bones reporting by radiographers: findings of an accredited postgraduate programme
Lockwood, P. 2017. CT Sinus and facial bones reporting by radiographers: findings of an accredited postgraduate programme. Dentomaxillofacial Radiology. 46 (4). https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr.20160440
Exploring variation and trends in adherence to national occupational standards for reporting radiographers
Lockwood, P. 2017. Exploring variation and trends in adherence to national occupational standards for reporting radiographers. Journal of Social Science & Allied Health Professions. 1 (1), pp. 20-27.
Observer performance in Computed Tomography head reporting
Lockwood, P. 2017. Observer performance in Computed Tomography head reporting. Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Sciences. 48 (1), pp. 22-29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmir.2016.08.001
Exploring the benefits of magnetic resonance imaging reporting by radiographers: A UK perspective
Lockwood, P. 2016. Exploring the benefits of magnetic resonance imaging reporting by radiographers: A UK perspective. Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Sciences. 47 (2). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmir.2015.12.083
An economic evaluation of introducing a skills mix approach to CT head reporting in clinical practice.
Lockwood, P. 2016. An economic evaluation of introducing a skills mix approach to CT head reporting in clinical practice. Radiography. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radi.2015.09.004
Intraorbital foreign body detection and localisation by radiographers: a preliminary JAFROC observer performance study
Lockwood, P., Pittock, L., Lockwood, C., Jeffery, C. and Piper, K. 2015. Intraorbital foreign body detection and localisation by radiographers: a preliminary JAFROC observer performance study. Radiography. 2015, pp. 1-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radi.2015.06.005
Out of the comfort zone (Part 2)
Lockwood, P. 2013. Out of the comfort zone (Part 2).
AFROC analysis of reporting radiographer’s performance in CT head interpretation
Lockwood, P. and Piper, K. 2015. AFROC analysis of reporting radiographer’s performance in CT head interpretation. Radiography. 21 (3), pp. e90-e95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radi.2015.04.001
Out of the comfort zone (Part 1)
Lockwood, P. 2013. Out of the comfort zone (Part 1).
Origins of the Reporting Radiographer
Lockwood, P. 2013. Origins of the Reporting Radiographer.
Patient safety and quality improvement: Iatrogenic venous air embolism in diagnostic imaging
Lockwood, P. and Breen, W. 2013. Patient safety and quality improvement: Iatrogenic venous air embolism in diagnostic imaging.
CT head reporting by radiographers: Findings of an accredited postgraduate programme
Lockwood, P. and Piper, K. 2013. CT head reporting by radiographers: Findings of an accredited postgraduate programme.
CT skull base & calvarium normal variant pitfalls
Lockwood, P. 2013. CT skull base & calvarium normal variant pitfalls.
CT head reporting by radiographers: results of an accredited postgraduate programme
Lockwood, P., Piper, K. and Pittock, L. 2015. CT head reporting by radiographers: results of an accredited postgraduate programme. Radiography. 21 (3), pp. e85-e89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radi.2014.12.001