Ponce García, VíctorSilva Viguera, María del CarmenGarcía Romera, Marta de la ConcepciónGuerra Sancho, Y.Heredia Rios, N.Bautista Llamas, María José2025-09-252025-09-252025Ponce García, V., Silva Viguera, M.d.C., García Romera, M.d.l.C., Guerra Sancho, Y., Heredia Rios, N. y Bautista Llamas, M.J. (2025). Validation and Evaluation of Visual Acuity and Contrastsensitivity with a New Digital Device: OPTOTAB®+. Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics, 45 (6), 1302-1316.https://doi.org/10.1111%2Fopo.13536.0275-5408https://hdl.handle.net/11441/177204Purpose: To validate a new digital device: Optotab®+ (SmarThings4Vision) formeasuring visual acuity (VA) and contrast sensitivity (CS). Methods: A validation study was conducted involving 20 healthy subjects (aged:18–29 years). Distance and near VA and CS were assessed using the Optotab®+ andcompared with the ETDRS test and Sloan letters for distance VA, the ETDRS testand LEA numbers® near vision card for near VA and the Regan and CSV-1000 testsfor CS. Results: No significant differences were noted between the right eye (RE) andleft eye (L for distance (p > 0.99) and near VA (p = 0.32) or test–retest measure-ments (p > 0.05) using the Optotab®+. Distance VA differed significantly from theETDRS (mean differences: −0.07 and −0.07 logMAR for the RE and LE, respectively,p = 0.01). Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) indicated moderate reliability (RE:0.64, LE: 0.48), while the ANOVA showed no significant differences (p = 0.75 for REand p = 0.58 for LE). For CS, no significant differences were found between the REand LE, except at 12 cpd (p = 0.04). ICC was highest at 18 cpd (0.90). A significanttest–retest difference was observed at 6 cpd for the RE (0.10 log units, p = 0.01).Comparisons showed significant differences at 6 cpd between Optotab®+ and theCSV-1000, and at 3, 12 and 18 cpd between Optotab®+ and the Regan test. ICC in-dicated low to high reliability across spatial frequencies, while the ANOVA did notshow significant differences or low variability. No significant inter-examiner dif-ferences were identified in VA and CS (p > 0.05), confirming strong reproducibility. Conclusions: This study demonstrates that the Optotab®+ has moderate reliabilityfor VA assessment and higher precision at higher spatial frequencies for CS, sug-gesting its clinical utility. Outcomes regarding reliability, repeatability and repro-ducibility support its validity as an effective tool for measuring visual parametersin clinical practice.application/pdf15 p.engAttribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internationalhttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/Contrast sensitivityOptotabRepeatabilityReproducibilityValidationVisual acuityinfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccesshttps://doi.org/10.1111%2Fopo.13536