Comparing the Potential Acuity Meter (PAM) and the Illuminated Near Card (INC) in Evaluating Potential Visual Acuity
Penny A Asbell, MD; Iris Krashin-Bishler, MD; Vilma Perez, MD; Clyde Schechter, MD; Patrick So, New York, New York.
Scientific Poster #253, American Academy of Ophthalmology, 1996.
Purpose: We compared the Potential Acuity Meter (PAM) and a new device, the Illuminated Near Card (INC), in evaluating potential visual acuity in patients with glaucomatous changes. Methods: Thirty-six eyes of 21 glaucoma patients were examined by both machines and compared to Snellen Visual Acuity. The length of time spent per eye was also compared. Results: INC produced the same results as the Snellen in nearly all patients (92%). The PAM has a strong tendency to underestimate the Snellen in the majority of patients (58%). Length of time needed for INC was shorter than for PAM (mean difference 70.6 seconds). Conclusion: Both devices produce results that correlate with Snellen Visual Acuity, but this tendency is significantly stronger for the INC.