Publication: Strabometry precision: intra-examiner repeatability and agreement in measuring the magnitude of the angle of latent binocular ocular deviations (heterophorias or latent strabismus)
Loading...
Official URL
Full text at PDC
Publication Date
2011
Advisors (or tutors)
Editors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Binoculus Publishing
Citations
Exportar
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: This study was designed to compare heterophoria measurements obtained using the methods: prisms cover test (prism alternate cover test), von Graefe technique, Maddox rod test and modified Thorington test. Given the different methodological features of these tests, our working hypothesis was that these tests would not be interchangeable and repeatability would vary.
METHODS: Horizontal deviation measurements were made at: far distance (six meters) and near distance (40 centimeters) on two occasions in 61 young subjects of mean age 19.7 years (range 18 -32 years), with essentially normal eyes and vision, who were not familiar with the methods used. Statistical repeatability and agreement were determined using the Bland and Altman method.
RESULTS: Repeatability: No difference between the results of the various heterophoria tests was statistically significant. Coefficients of repeatability were always best when the tests were conducted at far, the cover test being the most repeatable. Agreement: Mean differences between absolute values ranged from 1.7 prism diopters to 5.1 prism diopters for measurements at far and from 2.1 prism diopters to 3.4 prism diopters at near.
CONCLUSIONS: The alternating prism cover test was the most repeatable test for measuring latent horizontal deviations. Among the subjective tests, the modified Thorington test was the most repeatable. The low level of agreement observed between the different tests makes their interchangeable use in clinical practice not recommended.
Description
Es una versión preprint del artículo publicado.
COPYRIGHT 2012. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including xerographic copy, photocopy, recording, or an information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher, except as specifically allowed by law (each paid subscriber may print one hard copy of each issue, for personal use only, by simply executing the “print” command on their computer/printer
UCM subjects
Unesco subjects
Keywords
Citation
1. Goss DA. Ocular accommodation, convergence and fixation disparity: A manual of clinical analysis. 2ed. Boston: Butterworths-Heinemann; 1995:11-12, 70.
2. Griffin JR. Binocular anomalies: Procedures for vision therapy. 2. Chicago: Professional Press; 1982:140-147.
3. Fisher SK, Ciuffreda KJ, Tannen B. Stability of tonic vergence. InvestOphthal Vis Sci 1988;29:1577-1581.
4. Bernal J, Rosenfield M. Effect of heterophoria measurement technique on the clinical accommodative convergence to accommodation. Optometry 2006;77:229-234.
5. Wong EP, Fricke TR, Dinardo C. Interexaminer repeatability of a new, modified prentice card compared with established phoria tests. Optom Vis Sci 2002;79:370-375.
6. Johns HA, Manny RE, Fern K, Hu Y. The intraexaminer and interexaminer repeatability of the alternate cover test using different prism neutralization endpoints. Optom Vis Sci 2004;81:939-946.
7. Rainey BB, Schroeder TL, Goss DA, Grosvenor TP. Inter-examiner repeatability of heterophoria test. Optom Vis Sci 1998;75:719-726.
8. Schroeder TL, Rainey BB, Goss DA, Grosvenor TP. Reliability of and comparison among methods of measuring dissociated phoria. Optom Vis Sci 1996;73:389-397.
9. Scheiman M, Wick B. Clinical management of binoculr vision.Heterophoric accommodative and eye movement disorders. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2002.
10. Carlson NB, Kurtz D. Clinical procedures for ocular examination. 3ª ed. ed. New York: Mc Graw Hill; 2004.
11. Bland J, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1-8476 1986;307-310.
12. Schor CM, Ciuffreda KJ. Vergence Eye Movements. Basic and clinical aspects. Boston: Butterworth; 1983.
13. Elliott DB. Clinical procedures in primary eye care. Edinburgh: Butterworth Heinemann; 2003.
14. Zadnik K, Mutti DO, Adams AJ. The repeatability of measurement of the ocular components. Invest Ophthal Vis Sci1992;33:2325-2333.
15. Doherty BA, Geraci MJ. Comparative phoric measurements. Optom Wkly 1954;45:1479-1981.
16. Hirsch MJ, Bing LB. The effect of testing method on values obtained for phoria at forty centimeters. Am J Optom Arch Am Acad Optom 1948;25:407416.
17. Morgan MW. The reliability of clinical measurements with special reference to distance heterophoria. Am J Optom Arch Am Acad Optom 1955;32:167-179.
18. Morris FM. The influence of kinesthesis upon near heterophoria measurements. Am J Optom Arch Am Acad Optom 1960;37:327-351.
19. Scobee RG, Green EL. Tests for heterophoria-reliability of tests, comparisons between tests, and effect of changing teststing conditions. Trans Am Acad Ophthalmol Otolaryngol 1947;51:179-197.
20. Daum KM. Analysis of seven methods of measuring the angle of deviation. Am J Optom Physiol Opt 1983;60:46-51.
21. Thompson JT, Guyton DL. Ophthalmic prisms. Measurement errors and how to minimize them. Ophthalmology 1983;90:204-210.
22. Fogt N, Baughman BJ, Good G. The effect of experience on the detection of small eye movements. Optom Vis Sci 2000;77:670-674.
23. Ludvigh E. Amount of eye movement objetively perceptible to the unaided eye. Am J Ophthalmol 1949;32:649-650.
24. Sparks BI. Phoria variation secondary to cover test technique at near Optometry 2002;73:51-54.
25. Clack TE, Reynolds W, Coffey B. The effects of varying examiner position on alternating cover test results. Optometry 2003;74:233-239.
26. Rouse MW, Borsting E, Deland PN. Reliability of binocular vision measurements used in the classification of convergence insufficincy. Optom Vis Sci 2002;79:254-264.
27. Owens DA, Leibowitz HW. The fixation point as a stimulus for accommodation. Vis Res 1975;15:1161-1163.
28. Hirsch MJ. Clinical investigation of a method of testing phoria at forty centimeters. Am J Optom Arch Am Acad Optom 1948;25:492-495.
29. Casillas E, Rosenfield M. Comparison of subjective heterophoria testing ith a phoropter and trial frame. Optom Vis Sci 2006;83:237-241.
30. Weymouth FW. An experimental comparison of three common methods of measuring heterophoria. Am J Optom Arch Am Acad Optom 1963;40:497503.
31. Lam AKC, Lam A, Charm J, Wong K. Comparison of near heterophoria tests under varying conditions on an adult sample. Ophthal Physiol Opt 2005;25:162-167.
32. Rosenfield M. Tonic vergence and vergence adaptation. Optom Vis Sci 1997;74:303-328.