Noelia Nores-Palmas, Veronica Noya-Padin, Eva Yebra-Pimentel, Maria Jesus Giraldez, Hugo Pena-Verdeal
{"title":"比较四种测量异视和适应性辐辏与适应性比率的方法","authors":"Noelia Nores-Palmas, Veronica Noya-Padin, Eva Yebra-Pimentel, Maria Jesus Giraldez, Hugo Pena-Verdeal","doi":"10.3390/vision8040062","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The study aimed to assess the agreement between OptoTab SERIES, alternating Cover Test, Modified Thorington test, and Von Graefe method in measuring heterophoria and accommodative convergence over accommodation (AC/A) ratio. In an initial step, heterophoria was assessed at both distance and near in a cohort of 76 healthy young volunteers using the previously described tests. Subsequently, to determine the AC/A ratio, near-vision measurements were repeated with +1.00 D and -1.00 D lenses. All tests were performed in a randomized order across participants under consistent conditions. Significant differences were found between the Modified Thorington test and all other tests at distance (Wilcoxon test, all <i>p</i> ≤ 0.001) and between Von Graefe and all other tests at near (Wilcoxon test, all <i>p</i> ≤ 0.005). Regarding the AC/A ratio, significant differences were observed between all methods in +1.00 D AC/A ratio, except for the Modified Thorington test vs. the alternating Cover Test (Wilcoxon test, <i>p</i> = 0.024). In the -1.00 D AC/A ratio, differences were observed between OptoTab POCKET and all the other tests (Wilcoxon test, all <i>p</i> ≤ 0.001). The results indicate that all methods are interchangeable except the Modified Thorington test at distance and Von Graefe at near. For the AC/A ratio, only the Modified Thorington test is interchangeable with the alternating Cover Test using +1.00 D lenses and all are interchangeable using -1.00 D lenses except OptoTab POCKET.</p>","PeriodicalId":36586,"journal":{"name":"Vision (Switzerland)","volume":"8 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11503332/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of Four Methods for Measuring Heterophoria and Accommodative Convergence over Accommodation Ratio.\",\"authors\":\"Noelia Nores-Palmas, Veronica Noya-Padin, Eva Yebra-Pimentel, Maria Jesus Giraldez, Hugo Pena-Verdeal\",\"doi\":\"10.3390/vision8040062\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The study aimed to assess the agreement between OptoTab SERIES, alternating Cover Test, Modified Thorington test, and Von Graefe method in measuring heterophoria and accommodative convergence over accommodation (AC/A) ratio. In an initial step, heterophoria was assessed at both distance and near in a cohort of 76 healthy young volunteers using the previously described tests. Subsequently, to determine the AC/A ratio, near-vision measurements were repeated with +1.00 D and -1.00 D lenses. All tests were performed in a randomized order across participants under consistent conditions. Significant differences were found between the Modified Thorington test and all other tests at distance (Wilcoxon test, all <i>p</i> ≤ 0.001) and between Von Graefe and all other tests at near (Wilcoxon test, all <i>p</i> ≤ 0.005). Regarding the AC/A ratio, significant differences were observed between all methods in +1.00 D AC/A ratio, except for the Modified Thorington test vs. the alternating Cover Test (Wilcoxon test, <i>p</i> = 0.024). In the -1.00 D AC/A ratio, differences were observed between OptoTab POCKET and all the other tests (Wilcoxon test, all <i>p</i> ≤ 0.001). The results indicate that all methods are interchangeable except the Modified Thorington test at distance and Von Graefe at near. For the AC/A ratio, only the Modified Thorington test is interchangeable with the alternating Cover Test using +1.00 D lenses and all are interchangeable using -1.00 D lenses except OptoTab POCKET.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":36586,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Vision (Switzerland)\",\"volume\":\"8 4\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11503332/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Vision (Switzerland)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3390/vision8040062\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Vision (Switzerland)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/vision8040062","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
该研究旨在评估 OptoTab SERIES、交替遮盖试验、改良索林顿试验和 Von Graefe 方法在测量异视和容纳辐辏比(AC/A)方面的一致性。首先,在 76 名健康的年轻志愿者中,使用之前描述的测试方法对异视进行了远近评估。随后,为了确定AC/A比率,使用+1.00 D和-1.00 D镜片重复进行了近视测量。所有测试都是在一致的条件下以随机顺序对参与者进行的。结果发现,改良索林顿测试与所有其他测试在远视力方面存在显著差异(Wilcoxon 检验,所有 p 均小于 0.001),而 Von Graefe 测试与所有其他测试在近视力方面存在显著差异(Wilcoxon 检验,所有 p 均小于 0.005)。关于 AC/A 比率,除了改良 Thorington 试验与交替覆盖试验(Wilcoxon 检验,p = 0.024)之外,所有方法在 +1.00 D AC/A 比率上都有显著差异。在-1.00 D AC/A 比率中,OptoTab POCKET 与所有其他测试方法都存在差异(Wilcoxon 检验,所有 p 均小于 0.001)。结果表明,除了远距离的 Modified Thorington 检验和近距离的 Von Graefe 检验外,所有方法都可以互换。在 AC/A 比率方面,只有使用 +1.00 D 镜片的改良索林顿测试与交替遮盖测试可以互换,而使用 -1.00 D 镜片的所有测试方法都可以互换,OptoTab POCKET 除外。
Comparison of Four Methods for Measuring Heterophoria and Accommodative Convergence over Accommodation Ratio.
The study aimed to assess the agreement between OptoTab SERIES, alternating Cover Test, Modified Thorington test, and Von Graefe method in measuring heterophoria and accommodative convergence over accommodation (AC/A) ratio. In an initial step, heterophoria was assessed at both distance and near in a cohort of 76 healthy young volunteers using the previously described tests. Subsequently, to determine the AC/A ratio, near-vision measurements were repeated with +1.00 D and -1.00 D lenses. All tests were performed in a randomized order across participants under consistent conditions. Significant differences were found between the Modified Thorington test and all other tests at distance (Wilcoxon test, all p ≤ 0.001) and between Von Graefe and all other tests at near (Wilcoxon test, all p ≤ 0.005). Regarding the AC/A ratio, significant differences were observed between all methods in +1.00 D AC/A ratio, except for the Modified Thorington test vs. the alternating Cover Test (Wilcoxon test, p = 0.024). In the -1.00 D AC/A ratio, differences were observed between OptoTab POCKET and all the other tests (Wilcoxon test, all p ≤ 0.001). The results indicate that all methods are interchangeable except the Modified Thorington test at distance and Von Graefe at near. For the AC/A ratio, only the Modified Thorington test is interchangeable with the alternating Cover Test using +1.00 D lenses and all are interchangeable using -1.00 D lenses except OptoTab POCKET.