Dergiler / European Archives of Medical Research / 2021 / Cilt: 37 - Sayı: 1

Does Latent Strabismus Affect Stereoacuity?

Sayfa
15–19
Yayın Tarihi
2022-10-12
DOI
—
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

The mean age ofgroup A was found to be higher than that of group B (p=0.006).Conclusion: Latent deviation can mask true stereosensitivity potentials of subjects to some extent during the stereotesting procedure.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:Objective: The purpose of this study is to determine the effect of latent strabismus on stereoacuity.Methods: Stereoacuities of normal individuals, ranging in age from 18 to 35 years, were measured using the TNO or Titmus tests.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:The studypopulation was divided into 2 groups regarding the achievement of the accepted excellent stereoacuity threshold of 30 arcseconds (group A)or not (group B).
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:The mean age ofgroup A was found to be higher than that of group B (p=0.006).Conclusion: Latent deviation can mask true stereosensitivity potentials of subjects to some extent during the stereotesting procedure.
🔬Tür:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:Alan Parametreleri

Abstract

Objective: The purpose of this study is to determine the effect of latent strabismus on stereoacuity.Methods: Stereoacuities of normal individuals, ranging in age from 18 to 35 years, were measured using the TNO or Titmus tests. The studypopulation was divided into 2 groups regarding the achievement of the accepted excellent stereoacuity threshold of 30 arcseconds (group A)or not (group B). The relationship between latent deviation angles and stereoacuity levels were evaluated.Results: Latent deviation angles ranged from 0 to 35 prism diopters (PD). Both TNO (r=0.380 p=0.002) and Titmus (r=0.306 p=0.015)stereothresholds tended to increase as the latent deviation angles increased. Group A included 27 participants who had either exophoria(18) or orthophoria (9), and the mean deviation angle of this group was 3.07±3.26 PD. Group B included 36 participants, 28 of whom hadexophoria, three had esophoria, and the remaining five had orthophoria. The mean angle of deviation in group B was 6.50±6.92 PD. Thisvalue was statistically higher than the mean deviation angle in group A (p=0.012). Though none of the esophoric participants achievedexcellent stereoacuity, the distribution of the deviation types did not cause any difference between the groups (p=0.077). The mean age ofgroup A was found to be higher than that of group B (p=0.006).Conclusion: Latent deviation can mask true stereosensitivity potentials of subjects to some extent during the stereotesting procedure.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

AKMAZ, B., KOÇ, F., YURDAKUL, N. S. (2022). Does Latent Strabismus Affect Stereoacuity?. European Archives of Medical Research, Cilt: 37 - Sayı: 1, 15–19. https://ajindex.com/articles/510308

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (18)

  1. Cumming BG, DeAngelis GC. The physiology of stereopsis. Annu Rev Neurosci 2001;24:203-38
  2. Von Noorden GK, Campos EC. Binocular vision and space perception. In: Lampert R, Cox K, editors. Binocular Vision and Ocular Motility. 6th ed. Mosby: St. Louis; 1990.p.8-40
  3. Odell NV, Hatt SR, Leske DA, Adams WE, Holmes JM. The effect of induced monocular blur on measures of stereoacuity. J AAPOS 2009;13:136-41
  4. Leske DA, Birch EE, Holmes JM. Real depth vs randot stereotests. Am J Ophthalmol 2006;142:699-701
  5. Harwerth RS, Fredenburg PM. Binocular vision with primary microstrabismus. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2003;44:4293-306
  6. Frisby JP, Mein J, Saye A, Stanworth A. Use of random-dot sterograms in the clinical assessment of strabismic patients. Br J Ophthalmol 1975;59:545-52
  7. Lovasik JV, Szymkiw M. Effects of aniseikonia, anisometropia, accommodation, retinal illuminance, and pupil size on stereopsis. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1985;26:741-50
  8. Fu VL, Birch EE, Holmes JM. Assessment of a new Distance Randot stereoacuity test. J AAPOS 2006;10:419-23
  9. Rutstein RP, Eskridge JB. Stereopsis in small-angle strabismus. Am J Optom Physiol Opt 1984;61:491-8
  10. Lal G, Holmes JM. Postoperative stereoacuity following realignment for chronic acquired strabismus in adults. J AAPOS 2002;6:233-7
  11. Fawcett SL, Felius J, Stager DR. Predictive factors underlying the restoration of macular binocular vision in adults with acquired strabismus. J AAPOS 2004;8:439-44
  12. Fawcett SL, Stager DR Sr, Felius J. Factors influencing stereoacuity outcomes in adults with acquired strabismus. Am J Ophthalmol 2004;138:931-5
  13. Von Noorden GK, Campos EC. Depth Perception. In: Lampert R, Cox K, editors. Binocular Vision and Ocular Motility. 6th ed. Mosby: St. Louis; 2002.p.299-307
  14. Fender D, Julesz B. Extension of Panum’s fusional area in binocularly stabilized vision. J Opt Soc Am 1967;57:819-30
  15. Laird PW, Hatt SR, Leske DA, Holmes JM. Stereoacuity and binocular visual acuity in prism-induced exodeviation. J AAPOS 2007;11:362-6
  16. Tidbury LP, O’Connor AR, Wuerger SM. The effect of induced fusional demand on static and dynamic stereoacuity thresholds: the digital Synoptophore. BMC Ophthalmol 2019;19:6
  17. Archer SM, Miller KK, Helveston EM, Ellis FD. Vergence amplitudes with random-dot stereograms. Br J Ophthalmol 1986;70:718-23
  18. Vancleef K, Read JCA, Herbert W, Goodship N, Woodhouse M, SerranoPedraza I. Overestimation of stereo thresholds by the TNO stereot