[Skip to Navigation]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address 34.234.223.227. Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
Article
January 1987

Comparison of Electrodes for Electroretinography-Reply

Author Affiliations

Huddinge, Sweden

Arch Ophthalmol. 1987;105(1):23. doi:10.1001/archopht.1987.01060010025011
Abstract

In Reply.  —I appreciate Dr Kooijman's detailed comments. I fully agree with him that you get different responses with a ganzfeld stimulator than with a focal stimulator. However, the crucial point is that the same light stimulus is used with each electrode. Of course, as Dr Kooijman suggests, it would be interesting to perform another study with the use of a ganzfeld stimulator and compare the results. As Dr Kooijman has shown, other problems may arise when a ganzfeld stimulator is used because of the vignetting caused by some electrodes.The other point made in the comment is that of the coating agent. I must admit that it cannot be ruled out that even 0.5% hydroxypropyl methylcellulose might lower the amplitude in comparison with saline as a coating agent. As the aim of my study was to compare the registrations of different electrodes used in clinical practice, I just used

×