CClinicalTrials.gg
RecruitingNCT06224751CVTVUpdated Mar 18, 2024

Developing Better Computerised Vision Tests (CVTV)

An observational study in Visual Impairment, Amblyopia and Macular Degeneration, sponsored by Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust. Recruiting at 1 site in United Kingdom. Open to participants aged 3 Years to 99 Years, including healthy volunteers. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2024-03-18.

Sponsored by Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust · Observational

Study type
Observational
Model
Other
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrollment
550
Ages
3 Years to 99 Years
Sex
All
01

Study summary

Clinical vision measurements usually involve printed charts with an eye care professional interpreting patient responses to generate a score. Those scores determine the need for or outcome of treatment. Detecting change can be improved with strict procedures/scoring, lending itself to computerisation. This in turn allows integration with electronic medical records. Many eye tests could be computerised in this way. At Guys and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, the investigators have developed and validated a computerised test of distance visual acuity, called COMPlog which is now in widespread use. The investigators now want to increase the range of tests available.

There is also a need to longitudinally monitor for adverse change. Such monitoring must be developed to keep false positive and false negative change detection to a minimum.

The aims of this two year linked program are to:

Part A) validate an extended range of computerised vision measurement tests against their gold standard hard copy printed equivalents. Some of these tests are designed for use in children and all are meant to quantify both normal and impaired vision. Patients of all ages and visual function will therefore be recruited from St Thomas' Hospital. The specific tests we aim to validate are logMAR Letter Near Acuity, Word Near Acuity, Letter Contrast Sensitivity, Auckland Optotypes Picture Acuity, Low Contrast Letter Acuity, Stereoacuity and Vanishing Optotypes. Patients will undergo test-retest measurements with up to two of these.

Part B) Iteratively develop an application for use in home monitoring of subjects at risk of treatable vision loss due to age related macular degeneration.

All computerised tests in parts A and B will be performed on prototype software. Eye patients will be recruited as subjects. Patients recruited to part A will undergo tests on one day for up to an hour, subjects in part B will participate for between 1 hour and two months.

02

Conditions studied

  • Visual Impairment
  • Amblyopia
  • Macular Degeneration
  • Ophthalmic Disease

Keywords

  • Visual acuity
  • Visual function
  • Ocular disease
03

Who can participate

Ages eligible
3 Years to 99 Years
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
Yes
Sampling method
Non-probability sample

Study population

Patients attending the outpatient eye clinics at St Thomas' Hospital NHS Foundation Trust

Inclusion criteria

  • Male and female patients attending hospital eye clinics, aged 3 - 99, inclusive.
  • Patients able to understand the information sheet, and willing and able to give informed consent to participate.
  • Patients with visual function ranging from normal to severely impaired.
  • Willing and able to comply with the visual function testing protocol.
  • Some validation studies require recruitment of disease specific groups (such as children with amblyopia or adults with age related macular degeneration).

For Part B of the project which aims to develop and pilot a home monitoring application, only adult (18-99 years) subjects complying with the above who also own a suitable browser device will be recruited.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Unwilling or unable to comply with the visual function testing protocol.
  • Unwilling or unable to give informed consent.
  • Unwilling to participate.
  • In other research trials.
04

Study design

Observational model
Other
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrollment
550 participants (estimated)
Patient registry
No

Groups and cohorts

  • Near logMAR letter acuity

    Comparison of measurements made with the trial computerised test to the trial gold standard printed test

    Diagnostic Test: Near logMAR letter acuity

  • Near logMAR word acuity

    Comparison of measurements made with the trial computerised test to the trial gold standard printed test

    Diagnostic Test: Near LogMAR word acuity

  • Letter Contrast Sensitivity

    Comparison of measurements made with the trial computerised test to the trial gold standard printed test

    Diagnostic Test: Letter Contrast Sensitivity

  • Vanishing Optotype Sloan letters

    Comparison of measurements made with the trial computerised test to the trial gold standard printed test

    Diagnostic Test: Vanishing Optotype Sloan Letters

  • Auckland Optotypes/Auckland Vanishing Optotypes

    Comparison of measurements made with the trial computerised test to the trial gold standard printed test

    Diagnostic Test: Auckland Optotype/Auckland Vanishing Optotypes

  • Low contrast letter acuity

    Comparison of measurements made with the trial computerised test to the trial gold standard printed test

    Diagnostic Test: Low Contrast Letter Acuity

  • Red Green Stereoacuity

    Comparison of measurements made with the trial computerised test to the trial gold standard printed test

    Diagnostic Test: Red Green Stereoacuity

Interventions

  • Diagnostic testNear logMAR letter acuity

    Comparison of gold standard printed tests and computerised versions

  • Diagnostic testNear LogMAR word acuity

    Comparison of gold standard printed tests and computerised versions

  • Diagnostic testRed Green Stereoacuity

    Comparison of gold standard printed tests and computerised versions

  • Diagnostic testAuckland Optotype/Auckland Vanishing Optotypes

    Comparison of gold standard printed tests and computerised versions

  • Diagnostic testVanishing Optotype Sloan Letters

    Comparison of gold standard printed tests and computerised versions

  • Diagnostic testLetter Contrast Sensitivity

    Comparison of gold standard printed tests and computerised versions

  • Diagnostic testLow Contrast Letter Acuity

    Comparison of gold standard printed tests and computerised versions

05

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Test agreement between the computerised vision measurement test and the gold standard hard copy test.

    The test agreement is quantified in terms of the mean difference and 95% confidence interval of the mean in log units.

    Time frame: Through study completion, an average of 1 year

  2. Test-retest variability for the computerised vision measurement test and the gold standard hard copy test.

    Measurement variability (difference in two measures captured using the same vision test on the same day) will be quantified in log units for each vision test used in this study.

    Time frame: Through study completion, an average of 1 year

06

Study locations

1 of 1 sites recruiting
  • St Thomas' Hospital NHS Foundation Trust
    London, United Kingdom
    Recruiting
07

References and documents

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

No publications or documents are linked to this record.

08

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT06224751
Lead sponsor
Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust
Collaborators
King's College London
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Jan 25, 2024
Start date
Apr 2024 (estimated)
Primary completion
Jan 2025 (estimated)
Completion
Jan 2025 (estimated)
Last update
Mar 18, 2024

Study contacts

Abigail Orr, BSc
Contact
eyeresearch@gstt.nhs.uk
020 7188 4885
Alistair Laidlaw, MD FRCOphth
principal investigator · St Thomas' Hospital, London

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Interested in this study?

Eligibility is decided by the study team. Share this record with your doctor or contact the team directly.

Contact study team

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion