Percepción del emborronamiento estático y dinámico para el desarrollo de instrumentación clínica en optometría y oftalmología

Víctor Rodriguez-López

Descargar artículo

Información básica

Volumen

V57 - N3 / 2024 Ordinario

Referencia

51182

DOI

http://dx.doi.org/10.7149/OPA.57.3.51182

Idioma

English

Etiquetas

Emborronamiento, desenfoque, refracción, dominancia ocular, monovisión, efecto Pulfrich

Resumen

Este artículo resume la tesis doctoral del autor realizada en el Instituto de Óptica del Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas (IO-CSIC) bajo la dirección del Dr. Carlos Dorronsoro y premiada con el IX Premio Justiniano Casas. En resumen, esta tesis ha abarcado diferentes aspectos de la visión relacionados con la percepción del desenfoque, desde su descripción teórica hasta su aplicación clínica directa. En primer lugar, hemos estudiado la percepción espaciotemporal al desenfoque del sistema visual humano. En segundo lugar,hemos desarrollado y validado un nuevo método de refracción subjetiva para la medida rápida y precisa del error refractivo del ojo, basado en cambios rápidos de desenfoque. En tercer lugar, se ha desarrollado una nueva métrica para seleccionar el mejor ojo para la corrección de monovisión de la presbicia, que también proporciona una medida de la fuerza de la dominancia ocular. Por último, se descubrió una nueva ilusión óptica causada por diferencias de desenfoque entre ojos, con importantes implicaciones clínicas. De hecho, se desarrolló una nueva corrección óptica para compensar la ilusión óptica descubierta anteriormente, la corrección de monovisión anti-Pulfrich. Los resultados de esta tesis han hecho avanzar el conocimiento sobre la percepción del desenfoque y su aplicación al desarrollo de instrumentación clínica en optometría y oftalmología.

Referencias

Rodriguez-Lopez V. Perception of static and dynamic blur for developing clinical instrumentation in optometry and ophthalmology. 2022.

Lange, D H. Research into the dynamic nature of the human fovea-cortex systems with intermittent and modulated light. I. Attenuation characteristics with white and colored light. J Opt Soc Am. 1958;48(11):777–84.

Robson JG. Spatial and temporal contrast-sensitivity functions of the visual system. J Opt Soc Am. 1966;56(8):1141.

van Nes FL, Koenderink JJ, Nas H, Bouman MA. Spatiotemporal modulation transfer in the human eye. J Opt Soc Am. 1967;57(9):1082–8.

Watson AB. Temporal Sensitivity. Handbook of Perception and Human Performance. 1986. p. 6:1-6:43.

Watson AB, Ahumada A, Farrell JE. Window of Visibility: a psychophysical theory of fidelity in time-sampled visual motion displays. NASA Tech Pap. 1983;3(3):300–7.

Watson AB, Ahumada AJ. Blur clarified: A review and synthesis of blur discrimination. J Vis. 2011;11(2011):1–23.

Burge J, Geisler WS. Optimal defocus estimation in individual natural images. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2011;108(40):16849–54.

Dorronsoro C, Barcala X, Gambra E, et al. Tunable lenses: Dynamic characterization and fine-tuned control for high-speed applications. Opt Express. 2019;27(3).

Rodriguez-Lopez V, Hernandez-Poyatos A, Dorronsoro C. Defocus flicker of chromatic stimuli deactivates accommodation. Biomed Opt Express. 2023;14(7):3671–88.

Watson AB, Pelli DG. Quest: A Bayesian adaptive psychometric method. Percept Psychophys. 1983;33(2):113–20.

Mannos JL, Sakrison DJ. The effects of a visual fidelity criterion on the encoding of images. IEEE Trans Inf Theory. 1974;20(4):525–36.

Van Den Branden Lambrecht CJ, Kunt M. Characterization of human visual sensitivity for video imaging applications. Signal Processing. 1998;67(3):255–69.

Rodriguez-Lopez V, Geisler W, Dorronsoro C. Spatiotemporal defocus sensitivity function of the human visual system. Biomed Opt Express. 2023;14(7):3654–70.

Dorronsoro C, Radhakrishnan A, Alonso-Sanz JR, et al. Portable simultaneous vision device to simulate multifocal corrections. Optica. 2016;3(8).

Barcala X, Vinas M, Romero M, et al. Multifocal acceptance score to evaluate vision: MAS - 2EV. Sci Rep. 2021;11:1–15.

Elliott DB. Clinical procedures in primary eye care. 4th ed. London, United Kingdom; 2014. 68–111 p.

Elliott DB. What is the appropriate gold standard test for refractive error? Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 2017;37(2):115–7.

Dorronsoro C, Rodriguez-Lopez V. Device and system to conduct optometric measurements and method to adjust the optical power of a tunable lens. OEPM Patent Application Number: 201930198. Spain; 201930198, 2019.

Rodriguez-Lopez V, Dorronsoro C. Beyond traditional subjective refraction. Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2022;33(3):228–34.

Harris MG, Classé JG. Clinicolegal considerations of monovision. J Am Optom Assoc. 1988 Jun;59(6):491–5.

Jain S, Arora I, Azar DT. Success of monovision in presbyopes: Review of the literature and potential applications to refractive surgery. Surv Ophthalmol. 1996;40(6):491–9.

Mapp AP, Ono H, Barbeito R. What does the dominant eye dominate? A brief and somewhat contentious review. Percept Psychophys. 2003;65(2):310–7.

Coren S, Kaplan CP. Patterns of ocular dominance. Am J Optom Arch Am Acad Optom. 1973 Apr;50(4):283–92.

Seijas O, Gómez de Liaño P, Gómez de Liaño R, et al. Ocular dominance diagnosis and its influence in monovision. Am J Ophthalmol. 2007;144(2).

Ross NC, Bowers AR, Peli E. Peripheral prism glasses. Optom Vis Sci. 2012;89(9):1343–52.

García-Pérez MA, Peli E. Psychophysical tests do not identify ocular dominance consistently. Iperception. 2019;10(2).

Evans BJW. Monovision: A review. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 2007;27(5):417–39.

Rodriguez-Lopez V, Barcala X, Zaytouny A, et al. Monovision Correction Preference and Eye Dominance Measurements. Transl Vis Sci Technol. 2023 Mar;12(3):18.

Fernández E, Manzanera S, Piers P, Artal P. Adaptive Optics Visual Simulator. J Refract Surg. 2002 Sep 1;18(5):S634–8.

Radhakrishnan A, Pascual D, Marcos S, Dorronsoro C. Vision with different presbyopia corrections simulated with a portable binocular visual simulator. PLoS One. 2019;14(8):1–13.

Marcos S, Artal P, Atchison DA, et al. Adaptive optics visual simulators: a review of recent optical designs and applications. Biomed Opt Express. 2022 Dec;13(12):6508–32.

Barcala X, Vinas M, Ruiz S, et al. Multifocal contact lens vision simulated with a clinical binocular simulator. Contact Lens Anterior Eye. 2022;(May):101716.

Barbeito R. Sighting dominance: An explanation based on the processing of visual direction in tests of sighting dominance. Vision Res. 1981;21(6):855–60.

Gambra E, Dorronsoro C, Barcala X, et al. Binocular see-through vision device for far and near distances. Application number: M2201P006EP. M2201P006EP, 2022.

Pulfrich C. Die stereoskopie im dienste der isochromen und heterochromen photometrie. Naturwissenschaften. 1922;10(35):751–61.

Lit A. The magnitude of the Pulfrich stereophenomenon as a function of binocular differences of intensity at various levels of illumination. Am J Psychol. 1949;62(2):159–81.

Wilson JA, Anstis SM. Visual delay as a function of luminance. Am J Psychol. 1969;82(3):350–8.

Rogers BJ, Anstis SM. Intensity versus adaptation and the Pulfrich stereophenomenon. Vision Res. 1972;12(5):909–28.

Julesz B, White B. Short term visual memory and the Pulfrich phenomenon. Nature. 1969 May;222(5194):639–41.

Morgan MJ, Thompson P. Apparent motion and the Pulfrich effect. Perception. 1975;4(1):3–18.

Carney T, Paradiso MA, Freeman RD. A physiological correlate of the pulfrich effect in cortical neurons of the cat. Vision Res. 1989;29(2):155–65.

Reynaud A, Hess RF. Interocular contrast difference drives illusory 3D percept. Sci Rep. 2017;7(1):1–6.

Wheatstone C. On some remarkable, and hitherto unobserved, phenomena of binocular vision. Philos Trans R Soc London. 1838 Jan 1;128:371–94.

Burge, Johannes; Geisler W. Optimal disparity estimation in natural stereo images Johannes. J Vis. 2014;14(2):1–18.

Burge J, Rodriguez-Lopez V, Dorronsoro C. Monovision and the Misperception of Motion. Curr Biol. 2019;29(15):2586-2592.e4.

Rodriguez-Lopez V, Dorronsoro C, Burge J. Contact lenses, the reverse Pulfrich effect, and anti-Pulfrich monovision corrections. Sci Rep. 2020;10(1):1–16.

Burge J, Rodriguez-Lopez V, Dorronsoro C. Anti-Pulfrich monovision ophthalmic corrections. U.S. Application No. 62/799,468. 62/799,468, 2019.

Vassilev A, Mihaylova M, Bonnet C. On the delay in processing high spatial frequency visual information: reaction time and VEP latency study of the effect of local intensity of stimulation. 2002;42:851–64.

Westheimer G. Clinical evaluation of stereopsis. Vision Res. 2013;90:38–42.

Levi DM, Harweth RS, Manny RE. Suprathreshold spatial frequency detection and binocular interaction in strabismic and anisometropic amblyopia. Investig Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1979;18(7):714–25.

Nachmias J. Effect of exposure duration on visual contrast sensitivity with square-wave gratings. J Opt Soc Am. 1967;57(3):421–7.

Zhang M, Xiao J, Jiang C. Pseudophakic monovision is an important surgical approach to being spectacle-free. Indian J Ophthalmol. 2011;59(6):481.

Davidson RS, Dhaliwal D, Hamilton DR, et al. Surgical correction of presbyopia. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2016;42(6):920–30.

Wolffsohn JS, Davies LN. Presbyopia: Effectiveness of correction strategies. Prog Retin Eye Res. 2019;68:124–123.

Bannon RE, Neumueller J, Boeder P, Burian HM. Aniseikonia and space perception-after 50 years. Am J Optom Arch Am Acad Optom. 1970 Jun;47(6):423–41.

Rodriguez-Lopez V, Dorronsoro C. Case report of the evidence of a spontaneous Reverse Pulfrich effect in monovision after cataract surgery. BMC Ophthalmol. 2023;23(1):289.

Rodriguez-Lopez V, Chin B, Burge J. The impact of overall light-level on the reverse Pulfrich effect. bioRxiv. 2023 Jan 1;2023.09.27.559782.