DOI: 10.1097/ijg.0000000000002727 ISSN: 1057-0829

Reading Performance and Eye Movement Patterns in Glaucoma

Mariana Chiba Ikeda, André M V Messias, Sérgio H Teixeira, Koiti U Hamada, André H Bando, Vinícius P L Nakamura, Tiago S Prata, Andrew J Tatham, Augusto Paranhos, Carolina P B Gracitelli

Precis:

Glaucoma patients of similar age and educational level, compared with healthy individuals, exhibit a greater number of saccades and fixations during eye-tracked aloud reading, resulting in reduced reading speeds.

Purpose:

To evaluate reading performance in patients with glaucoma compared with controls using an eye tracker and to explore the potential confounding effects of patients’ contrast sensitivity and cognition.

Material and Methods:

A cross-sectional study was conducted with 111 participants (57 with glaucoma and 54 controls) with a Best-Corrected Visual Acuity of ≥0.5 logMAR. Cognition was assessed using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment, and contrast sensitivity was measured with the Freiburg Visual Acuity & Contrast Test. A reading performance evaluation was conducted using the Minnesota Low Vision Reading Test displayed on slides on a computer screen. Reading speed was calculated in words per minute, and an eye tracker was used to analyze saccade and fixation patterns during the reading task.

Results:

Mean age was 61.8 (± 11.6) and 66.5 (± 13.7) in the glaucoma and control groups, respectively ( P = 0.05). Best-Corrected Visual Acuity was 0.18 (± 0.16) and 0.04 (± 0.10) logMAR in the glaucoma and control group, respectively ( P < 0.001). Montreal Cognitive Assessment score was 21.8 (± 3.5) in the glaucoma and 21.4 (± 4.0) in the control group ( P = 0.566). Twenty-six percent of the glaucoma group and thirty-three percent of the control group had at least primary education. Controls read faster and showed fewer saccades and fixations than patients with glaucoma ( P < 0.05) across all five slides.

Conclusions:

Patients with glaucoma exhibit poorer reading performance as evidenced by eye-tracker data compared with controls of similar age, cognitive function, and educational level.

More from our Archive