Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 30, 2026
Motion-Acuity Test for Visual Field Acuity Measurement with Motion-Defined Shapes
Published on: February 23, 2024
Assessment of parafoveal function in maculopathy: a comparison between the Macular Mapping Test and kinetic Manual
Susanne Trauzettel-Klosinski1, Petra Biermann, Gesa Hahn
1Department of Pathophysiology of Vision and Neuro-Ophthalmology, University Eye Hospital Tübingen, Schleichstrasse 12-16, 72076 Tübingen, Germany. setrauze@med.uni-tuebingen.de
Background:
Parafoveal function is crucial for patients with maculopathies, because they have to use the parafoveal retina for reading after foveal vision loss. Manual perimetry is a reliable but lengthy method for assessing macular function. The Macular Mapping Test (MMTest) was therefore designed as a quick and easy test. In this study both methods were compared in patients with central scotoma.
Methods:
In 50 patients with maculopathy (22 Stargardt's, 20 age-related, 5 diabetic, 3 other macular dystrophies), 30 degrees Tuebingen Manual Perimetry was performed kinetically. The MMTest assesses local responses to brief displays of letters in the central visual field (8 degrees radius) on a computer screen. A "wagon-wheel" pattern is used to stabilize gaze in the center. Comparison of the methods was based on the correspondence of field defects in each sector.
Results:
The overall correspondence was 87.5%. The results could be divided into three groups, depending on fixation behavior: group 1 ( n=27): central fixation in both methods, median correspondence 87.5%, best in Stargardt's disease (95.3%), lowest in diabetic maculopathy (71.8%); group 2 ( n=21): eccentric fixation in both methods (84.3%); group 3 ( n=2): eccentric in TMP, central in MMTest (65.6% and 81.2%).
Conclusion:
Provided that the fixation locus is known, the MMTest is a quick and easy screening method, which shows a high correspondence with the results of manual perimetry.
