Person:
Antona Peñalba, Beatriz

Loading...
Profile Picture
First Name
Beatriz
Last Name
Antona Peñalba
Affiliation
Universidad Complutense de Madrid
Faculty / Institute
Óptica y Optometría
Department
Optometría y Visión
Area
Optica
Identifiers
UCM identifierORCIDScopus Author IDDialnet IDGoogle Scholar ID

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Item
    High AC/A Accommodative Esotropia Strabismus Treated with Contact Lenses: A Single Case Design (N=1) Study
    (Binocular vision & strabismus quarterly, 2007) González Díaz-Obregón, Enrique; Barra Lázaro, Francisco; Sánchez Pérez, Isabel; Antona Peñalba, Beatriz; Barrio De Santos, Ana Rosa
    BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The purpose was to determine the efficacy of two types of contact lenses (spherical disposable and aplanatic) as treatment in a patient with esotropia with a high Accommodative Convergence/Accommodation Ratio (AC/A). Due to the possibility of the appearance of accommodative insufficiency in this kind of patient, (i.e., following many years of bifocal glasses use), the elimination of the plus addition lens is advisable. Nevertheless, in some patients, this change leads to the appearance of a residual angle of esodeviation in near vision. It was expected that monofocal aplanatic contact lenses could achieve, due to their optical characteristics, an accurate and orthotropic binocular alignment, without aggravating an undesirable manifestation of the accommodative insufficiency. METHODS: An experimental design of a single case (N=1) was used in which the subject acted as his own control. With bifocal glasses the subject displayed stability in his binocular and accommodative system at every distance of vision for the past three years. We compared the efficacy of two different types of hydrophilic contact lenses to control the angle of deviation, both at distance and at near vision. RESULTS: Neither of the two contact lenses produced the results of stability and the correct binocular alignment that had been achieved with bifocal glasses. This subject experienced a worse manifest esodeviation in distance vision with aplanatic lenses than with the disposable ones. CONCLUSIONS: These monofocal contact lenses did not create acceptable binocular alignment and stability in a subject with a high AC/A accommodative esotropia.
  • Item
    Strabometry precision: intra-examiner repeatability and agreement in measuring the magnitude of the angle of latent binocular ocular deviations (heterophorias or latent strabismus)
    (Binocular vision & strabology quarterly, Simms-Romano's, 2011) Antona Peñalba, Beatriz; González Díaz-Obregón, Enrique; Barrio De Santos, Ana Rosa; Barra Lázaro, Francisco; Sánchez Pérez, Isabel; Cebrián, José Luis
    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.