Processant ...

Accurate interpretation of visual evoked potentials (VEPs) is essential in the diagnosis and monitoring of numerous neurological and ophthalmological disorders. The reliability of these tests largely depends on the correct placement of electrodes on the scalp, traditionally guided by the 10/20 international system. However, this method can be time-consuming and difficult to implement consistently in real clinical environments, especially with high healthcare workload. This study is based on a comparison between a simplified and efficient, approximative method, and the international accepted, 10/20 method, for visual evoked potentials. Through a comparative analysis of both methods, we examine key VEP feature particularly the latencies and amplitudes of peaks N75, P100, and N145 and focus on interocular differences and vertical distance between electrodes of each method as markers of clinical relevance. Our goal is to assess whether the approximative method maintain sensitivity to asymmetries in visual function, which are often critical in detecting early signs of optic nerve dysfunction or central nervous system pathologies, at the same precision and specificity as the 10/20 international system. The findings of this research may contribute to the development of more flexible and efficient VEP testing protocols, with the potential to improve clinical workflows while preserving diagnostic precision.