Feasibility of optical quality analysis system for the objetctive assessment of accommodation insufficiency: a phase 1 study

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorLópez Artero, Esther
dc.contributor.authorGarzón Jiménez, Nuria
dc.contributor.authorRodríguez Vallejo, Manuel
dc.contributor.authorGarcía Montero, María
dc.date.accessioned2023-06-16T15:20:45Z
dc.date.available2023-06-16T15:20:45Z
dc.date.issued2020
dc.descriptionRecibido: 11 enero 2020; Aceptado: 29 junio 2020
dc.description.abstractPurpose: To assess differences in a new objective metric obtained with a double-pass technique between a group with accommodation insufficiency (AI) and a control group and to explore the diagnostic capabilities of this new tool in comparison to conventional procedures. Methods: Retrospective cross-sectional case-control phase 1 study. Two groups age ranging from 8 to 18 years were recruitment: AI and control group. The diagnostic criterion of AI was based on monocular accommodative amplitude (AA) 2 D below Hofstetter’s calculation for minimum AA and monocular accommodative facility (MAF) failing with minus lens and cut-off at ≤ 6 cycles per minute. Accommodative response with a double pass device (HD Analyzer, Visiometrics) was measured, performing an evaluation from +1.00 D to −3.50D (−0.5D steps), offering the width of the profile at 50% (WP) in minutes of arc. Results: Differences were found between groups for the AA, MAF and MEM retinoscopy (p < 0.0001, p < 0.001, p = 0.037). The discriminative capacity of MEM retinoscopy for AI diagnosis was significant and the cut-off that maximized the sensitivity and specificity was > 0.5 D. Considering WP 50% in different points, the discriminative AI diagnosis capacities for the points of 2.0 D and 2.50 D were significant (ROC-AUC 0.78; p = 0.03 and p = 0.02). Conclusions: Double-pass system metric differed between patients with AI and control group, therefore the aim of a Phase I study was achieved. Further steps with higher sample sizes are required to evidence if the system really provides any advantage versus conventional methods in the diagnosis of AI.
dc.description.departmentDepto. de Optometría y Visión
dc.description.facultyFac. de Óptica y Optometría
dc.description.refereedTRUE
dc.description.statusinpress
dc.eprint.idhttps://eprints.ucm.es/id/eprint/61679
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.optom.2020.06.004
dc.identifier.issn1888-4296
dc.identifier.officialurlhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.optom.2020.06.004
dc.identifier.relatedurlhttp://www.journalofoptometry.org/
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14352/6427
dc.journal.titleJournal of Optometry
dc.language.isoeng
dc.page.initial8 p.
dc.publisherSpanish General Council of Optometrists; Elsevier
dc.rightsAtribución-NoComercial-SinDerivadas 3.0 España
dc.rights.accessRightsopen access
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/es/
dc.subject.cdu617.726
dc.subject.cdu681.784.47
dc.subject.keywordAccommodation insufficiency
dc.subject.keywordAmplitude accommodation
dc.subject.keywordDoble-Pass
dc.subject.ucmOptometría
dc.subject.ucmÓptica geométrica e instrumental
dc.subject.unesco2209.15 Optometría
dc.subject.unesco2209.06 Óptica geométrica
dc.titleFeasibility of optical quality analysis system for the objetctive assessment of accommodation insufficiency: a phase 1 study
dc.typejournal article
dspace.entity.typePublication
relation.isAuthorOfPublication367ce491-287f-4b2a-ba6a-870a393c5609
relation.isAuthorOfPublication9b637d56-481e-40c6-a0e6-eb4de92e663c
relation.isAuthorOfPublication.latestForDiscovery367ce491-287f-4b2a-ba6a-870a393c5609
Download
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Nuria Garzón_2020julio_journal opotmetry_uncorrected proof.pdf
Size:
9.23 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
downoload Download
Collections
Artículos