Repeatability and agreement in the measurement of horizontal fusional vergences

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorAntona Peñalba, Beatriz
dc.contributor.authorBarrio De Santos, Ana Rosa
dc.contributor.authorBarra Lázaro, Francisco
dc.contributor.authorGonzález Díaz-Obregón, Enrique
dc.contributor.authorSánchez Pérez, María Isabel
dc.date.accessioned2023-06-20T11:01:53Z
dc.date.available2023-06-20T11:01:53Z
dc.date.issued2008
dc.descriptionEs una versión postprint del artículo. The final publication is available at Wiley: http://dxdoi.org/10.1111/j.1475-1313.2008.00583.x
dc.description.abstractPurpose: This study was designed to determine the repeatability of fusional vergence rangesmeasured using the rotary prisms in the phoropter and in free space using the prism bar. The level of agreement between the two methods was also investigated.. Methods: In two separate sessions, negative and positive fusional vergence ranges (NFV and PFV, respectively) were measured at distance and near in 61 young adults (mean age 19.74, S.D. 2.5 years) who were unfamiliar with the methods used. Base-in and base-out blur, break and recovery points were sequentially determined. Both sets of measurements were obtained by the same examiner. At each distance, NFV was determined first and then PFV. The repeatability of the tests and agreement between measurements made with the phoropter rotary prisms and the prism bar were estimated by the Bland and Altman method. Results: For both the phoropter rotary prisms and prism bar, NFV measurements showed better repeatability than PFV at both near and distance. Mean differences recorded for the NFV break and recovery points were non-significant (under 0.5D), while those observed for PFV were generally greater than 2D. When agreement between the two tests was assessed, it was found that break points were higher when determined using the phoropter rotary prisms, while recovery points were generally higher for the prism bar method. In clinical terms, according to the expected values of the NFV and PFV, agreement between the two techniques can be described as fair, because although mean differences were never greater than 5.5D, 95% agreement intervals were as wide as ±8.00D for NFV and ±13.19D for PFV. Conclusions: The two methods used to measure fusional vergences showed fairly good inter- session repeatability for measuring NFV but repeatability was reduced for PFV measurements. The level of agreement observed between the two methods was such that their interchangeable use in clinical practice is not recommended.
dc.description.departmentDepto. de Optometría y Visión
dc.description.facultyFac. de Óptica y Optometría
dc.description.refereedTRUE
dc.description.statuspub
dc.eprint.idhttps://eprints.ucm.es/id/eprint/33889
dc.identifier.citationArgimon, J. M. and Jimenez, J. (2004) Metodos de Investigacion Clınica y Epidemiologica. Elsevier, Madrid. Bland, J. and Altman, D. G. (1986) Statistical methods forassessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1, 307–310. Burian, H. M. (1939) Fusional eye movements: role of peripheral retinal stimuli. Arch. Ophthalmol. 21, 486–491. Carlson, N. B. and Kurtz, D. (2004) Clinical Procedures for Ocular Examination. Mc Graw Hill, New York. Ciuffreda, K. J. (1992) Components of clinical near vergence testing. J. Behav. Optom. 3, 3–13. Ciuffreda, M. A., Ciuffreda, K. J. and Wang, B. (2006) Repeatability and variability of near vergence ranges. J. Behav. Optom. 17, 39–46. D'Augostino, R. B. and Stevens, M. A. (1986). Tests for the Normal Distribution. Marcel Dekker, New York. Daum, K. M. (1991) Vergence amplitude. In: Clinical Procedures in Optometry (eds J. B. Eskridge, J. F. Amos and J. D. Bartlett), Lippincott, Philadelphia, pp. 91–98. Feldman, J. M., Cooper, J., Carniglia, P., Schiff, F. M. and Skeete, J. N. (1989) Comparison of fusional ranges measured by Risley prisms, vectograms and computer orthopter. Optom. Vis. Sci. 66, 375–382. Goss, D. A. (1995) Effect of test sequence on fusional vergence ranges. N. Engl. J. Optom. 47, 39–42. Morgan, M. (1944) Analysis of clinical data. Am. J. Optom. Arch. Am. Acad. Optom. 21, 477–491. Penisten, D. K., Hofstetter, H. W. and Goss, D. A. (2001) Reliability of rotary prism fusional vergence ranges. Optometry 72, 117–122. Rosenfield, M., Ciuffreda, K. J., Ong, E. and Super, S. (1995) Vergence adaptation and the order of clinical vergence range testing. Optom. Vis. Sci. 72, 219–223. Rouse, M. W., Borsting, E. and Deland, P. N. (2002) Reliability of binocular vision measurements used in the classification of convergence insufficiency. Optom. Vis. Sci.79, 254–264. Saladin, J. J. (1998) Phorometry and stereopsis. In: Clinical Refraction (ed. W. J. Benjamin), Saunders Company, Philadelphia, pp. 724–773. Scheiman, M. and Wick, B. (2002). Clinical Management of Binocular Vision. Heterophoric Accommodative and Eye Movement Disorders. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Philadelphia. Scheiman, M., Herzberg, H. and Frantz, K. (1989) A normative study of step vergence in elementary schoolchildren. J. Am. Optom. Assoc. 60, 276–280. Scheiman, M., Mitchell, G. L., Cotter, S., Cooper, J., Kulp, M., Rouse, M., Borsting, E., London, R. and Wensveen, J. (2005) A randomized clinical trial of treatment for convergence insufficiency in children. Arch. Ophthalmol. 123, 14–24. Schor, C. M. and Ciuffreda, K. J. (1983). Vergence Eye Movements. Basic and Clinical Aspects. Butterworth, Boston. Sheedy, J. E. and Saladin, J. J. (1977) Phoria, vergence and fixation disparity in oculomotor problems. Am. J. Optom. Physiol. Opt. 54, 474–478. Sheedy, J. E. and Saladin, J. J. (1983) Validity of diagnostic criteria and case analysis in binocular vision disorders. In: Vergence Movements: Basic and Clinical Aspects (eds C. M. Schor and K. J. Ciuffreda), Butterworth, Boston, pp. 517–540. Tannen, B. and Ciuffreda, K. J. (1995). Eye Movement Basics for the Clinician. Mosby Year-Book, St Louis. Wesson, M. D. (1982) Normalization of prims bar vergences. Am. J. Optom. Physiol. Opt. 59, 628–633. Zadnik, K., Mutti, D. O. and Adams, A. J. (1992) The repeatability of measurement of the ocular components. Invest. Ophthal. Vis. Sci. 33, 2325–2333.
dc.identifier.doihttp://dxdoi.org/10.1111/j.1475-1313.2008.00583.x
dc.identifier.issn0275-5408
dc.identifier.officialurlhttp://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1475-1313.2008.00583.x/abstract
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14352/51620
dc.issue.number5 Sept
dc.journal.titleOphthalmic and Physiological Optics
dc.language.isoeng
dc.page.final491
dc.page.initial475
dc.publisherWILEY-BLACKWELL Publishing
dc.rights.accessRightsopen access
dc.subject.cdu617.758.1
dc.subject.keywordConvergence insufficience
dc.subject.keywordAgreement
dc.subject.keywordPhoropter rotary prisms
dc.subject.keywordPositive and negative fusional vergence
dc.subject.keywordPrism bar
dc.subject.keywordRepeatability
dc.subject.ucmOptometría
dc.subject.unesco2209.15 Optometría
dc.titleRepeatability and agreement in the measurement of horizontal fusional vergences
dc.typejournal article
dc.volume.number28
dspace.entity.typePublication
relation.isAuthorOfPublication4d93581c-fa46-4362-886f-96b13e817c13
relation.isAuthorOfPublication489b4330-7884-43a8-846f-7a6dea5cdeec
relation.isAuthorOfPublication8215ed9f-0de3-40c2-b832-e1377967bba7
relation.isAuthorOfPublication0f69baec-32d9-4337-bf45-1f03d71cf698
relation.isAuthorOfPublicationfaf5753f-5a28-48d8-993a-3829407efbbc
relation.isAuthorOfPublication.latestForDiscovery4d93581c-fa46-4362-886f-96b13e817c13
Download
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
opo583[1].pdf
Size:
997.91 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
downoload Download
Collections
Artículos