Skip to main content
Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and Psychiatry logoLink to Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and Psychiatry
. 1978 Dec;41(12):1069–1077. doi: 10.1136/jnnp.41.12.1069

The Pulfrich spatial frequency phenomenon: a psychophysical method competitive to visual evoked potentials in the diagnosis of multiple sclerosis.

E R Wist, M Hennerici, J Dichgans
PMCID: PMC493233  PMID: 731251

Abstract

The results of a study in which visual evoked responses (VERs) and a modified Pulfrich method were compared showed that both methods are very effective for the diagnosis of multiple sclerosis. With VERs, 97% of the multiple sclerosis cases were diagnosed correctly, while the corresponding value for the Pulfrich method was 93%. In contrast to VERs, the Pulfrich method allows only measurement of latency differences between the two visual pathways. This method involves measuring the speed required to cause a shift in the apparent depth location of a large, moving, striped pattern observed with a neutral density filter over one eye. A pathological transmission time was inferred when the patients observed a shift in the depth of the moving pattern either without any filter at all or with a filter whose attentuation was no more than 0.2 log units. A further criterion for pathology was a difference of more than 10% between the two eyes in the retinal speed required for a depth displacement using a 1.5 log unit filter. This test requires about 15 minutes, and can be carried out by a technical assistant.

Full text

PDF
1072

Images in this article

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Asselman P., Chadwick D. W., Marsden D. C. Visual evoked responses in the diagnosis and management of patients suspected of multiple sclerosis. Brain. 1975 Jun;98(2):261–282. doi: 10.1093/brain/98.2.261. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Frisen L., Hoyt W. F., Bird A. C., Weale R. A. Diagnostic uses of the Pulfrich phenomenon. Lancet. 1973 Aug 18;2(7825):385–386. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(73)93238-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Halliday A. M., McDonald W. I., Mushin J. Delayed visual evoked response in optic neuritis. Lancet. 1972 May 6;1(7758):982–985. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(72)91155-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Hennerici M., Wenzel D., Freund H. J. The comparison of small-size rectangle and checkerboard stimulation for the evaluation of delayed visual evoked responses in patients suspected of multiple sclerosis. Brain. 1977 Mar;100(Pt 1):119–136. doi: 10.1093/brain/100.1.119. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Heron J. R., Regan D., Milner B. A. Delay in visual perception in unilateral optic atrophy after retrobulbar neuritis. Brain. 1974 Mar;97(1):69–78. doi: 10.1093/brain/97.1.69. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. McDonald W. I., Halliday A. M. Diagnosis and classification of multiple sclerosis. Br Med Bull. 1977 Jan;33(1):4–9. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Rushton D. Use of the Pulfrich pendulum for detecting abnormal delay in the visual pathway in multiple sclerosis. Brain. 1975 Jun;98(2):283–296. doi: 10.1093/brain/98.2.283. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Wist E. R., Brandt T., Diener H. C., Dichgans J. Spatial frequency effect on the Pulfrich stereophenomenon. Vision Res. 1977;17(3):391–397. doi: 10.1016/0042-6989(77)90029-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and Psychiatry are provided here courtesy of BMJ Publishing Group

RESOURCES