Clinical Evaluation of the MKH-HAASE Stereoacuity Tests

{"title":"Clinical Evaluation of the MKH-HAASE Stereoacuity Tests","authors":"","doi":"10.31707/vdr2018.4.2.p78","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: H.J. Haase developed a set of tests for measuring associated phoria and\nstereopsis using a variety of different targets for each. This study investigates the test-retest repeatability of the distance and near stereopsis tests for the MKH-Haase charts.\n\nMethods: MKH-Haase contour (Line Test) and randomdot (Steps Test) stereopsis\ntests were measured at distance and near for 34 symptomatic and 40 asymptomatic\nparticipants on two different sessions. The MKH-Haase protocol requires the stereoacuity to be measured twice within a session; once for crossed and once for uncrossed disparities. \n\nResults: Direct comparison within sessions did not reveal any significant differences in MKHHaase stereoacuity tests between symptomatic and asymptomatic groups; hence, the two groups were pooled for further analysis. The within and between-sessions repeatability of most MKH-Haase stereoacuity tests results was good at both distance and near. However, there were a few exceptions to this general finding. Crossed disparity thresholds were significantly lower than uncrossed disparities within the first session at distance for both Line and Steps tests. The differences between sessions for both disparities were not significant for all stereoacuity tests except the Steps test at distance.\n\nConclusions: MKH-Haase stereoacuity charts are considered reliable tests for measuring local and global stereothreshold at both distance and near.","PeriodicalId":91423,"journal":{"name":"Vision development and rehabilitation","volume":"70 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-06-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Vision development and rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31707/vdr2018.4.2.p78","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Background: H.J. Haase developed a set of tests for measuring associated phoria and stereopsis using a variety of different targets for each. This study investigates the test-retest repeatability of the distance and near stereopsis tests for the MKH-Haase charts. Methods: MKH-Haase contour (Line Test) and randomdot (Steps Test) stereopsis tests were measured at distance and near for 34 symptomatic and 40 asymptomatic participants on two different sessions. The MKH-Haase protocol requires the stereoacuity to be measured twice within a session; once for crossed and once for uncrossed disparities. Results: Direct comparison within sessions did not reveal any significant differences in MKHHaase stereoacuity tests between symptomatic and asymptomatic groups; hence, the two groups were pooled for further analysis. The within and between-sessions repeatability of most MKH-Haase stereoacuity tests results was good at both distance and near. However, there were a few exceptions to this general finding. Crossed disparity thresholds were significantly lower than uncrossed disparities within the first session at distance for both Line and Steps tests. The differences between sessions for both disparities were not significant for all stereoacuity tests except the Steps test at distance. Conclusions: MKH-Haase stereoacuity charts are considered reliable tests for measuring local and global stereothreshold at both distance and near.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
MKH-HAASE立体视力试验的临床评价
背景:H.J. Haase开发了一套测试来测量相关的斜视和立体视,使用各种不同的目标。本研究探讨了MKH-Haase图的距离和近立体视测试的重测重复性。方法:对34例有症状者和40例无症状者在两个不同的时段进行远距离和近距离立体抵抗测试。MKH-Haase协议要求在一次测试中测量两次立体视敏度;一次是交叉的,一次是未交叉的。结果:疗程内的直接比较未显示有症状组和无症状组的MKHHaase立体视力测试有任何显著差异;因此,将两组合并进行进一步分析。大多数MKH-Haase立体视力测试结果在远距离和近距离上的重复性都很好。然而,这一普遍发现也有一些例外。在直线和步骤测试中,交叉差异阈值在距离上显著低于未交叉差异阈值。除了距离上的Steps测试外,两种差异在所有立体敏锐度测试中的差异都不显著。结论:MKH-Haase立体视敏度图被认为是在远近距离测量局部和全局立体阈值的可靠测试。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Vision Therapy for Convergence and Accommodative Insufficiency in Post-Concussion Syndrome Using Principles of Neuroplasticity and Visual-Vestibular Function in the Treatment of 6th Cranial Nerve Palsy or Paresis A Tribute to Melvin Kaplan, OD, FCOVD The Effects of Increased Near Point Stress on the Visual System of Pediatric Patients with Strabismus Alva Noë, Art and Vision Therapy
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1