Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 12, 2026

Binocular Dynamic Visual Acuity in Eyeglass-Corrected Myopic Patients
Published on: March 29, 2022
Comparative Evaluation of Uncorrected Visual Acuity in Refractive Error Patients Aged Between 18-25 Years and 38-45
Debapriyo Chatterjee1, Shoubhik Chakraborty1, Anushka Sain2
1Optometry, New School Human Management (NSHM) College of Management and Technology, Durgapur, IND.
None:
Background Refractive error is a widespread cause of decreased visual acuity, which can impact academic success, work productivity, and quality of life. Uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA) provides baseline information regarding refractive status before optical correction. The purpose of this study was to compare UCVA between adults aged 18-25 years and 38-45 years. Methodology This cross-sectional study was conducted in the Department of Optometry at the NSHM College of Management and Technology, Durgapur, West Bengal, India, between November 2025 and April 2026. A total of 300 participants undergoing refractive assessment were enrolled, comprising two equal age groups. Group A consisted of 150 individuals aged 18-25 years, and Group B consisted of 150 individuals aged 38-45 years. UCVA was measured using a Snellen chart and subsequently converted to logMAR values for statistical analysis. Each participant underwent a comprehensive refraction assessment and was included in the study only if their best-corrected visual acuity was 6/9 or better. Welch's independent-samples t-test was applied to compare UCVA between the groups, while categorical variables were analyzed using the chi-square test. Results The mean UCVA for the right eye was significantly poorer in the 18-25-year group than in the 38-45-year group (0.249 ± 0.199 vs. 0.142 ± 0.117 logMAR; mean difference: 0.107; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.070-0.144; p < 0.001). Left eye UCVA was poorer in the younger group (0.187 ± 0.199 vs. 0.136 ± 0.120 logMAR; mean difference: 0.051; 95% CI: 0.014-0.088; p = 0.008). There was no significant difference in gender distribution between the groups (p = 0.160). The distribution of refractive errors varied significantly between the groups (p < 0.001), and compound myopic astigmatism was more prevalent in the 18-25-year group (149 eyes, 49.7%) compared with the 38-45-year group (1 eye, 0.3%). Conclusions The UCVA scores of participants aged 18-25 years were significantly lower than those of the 38-45-year-old participants. The poorer UCVA was mainly associated with higher compound myopic astigmatism, highlighting the need for regular refractive screening and timely optical correction among young adults.

