Suppr超能文献

眼优势诊断及其在单眼视中的影响。

Ocular dominance diagnosis and its influence in monovision.

作者信息

Seijas Olga, Gómez de Liaño Pilar, Gómez de Liaño Rosario, Roberts Clare J, Piedrahita Elena, Diaz Ester

机构信息

Gregorio Marañon University Hospital, Madrid, Spain.

出版信息

Am J Ophthalmol. 2007 Aug;144(2):209-216. doi: 10.1016/j.ajo.2007.03.053. Epub 2007 May 29.

Abstract

PURPOSE

To analyze the response of normal emmetropic subjects to different ocular dominance tests and to analyze the influence of this response in surgically induced monovision.

DESIGN

A prospective study of diagnostic accuracy was carried out to analyze the different tests to determine ocular dominance, without a gold standard test.

METHODS

Nine different tests were carried out in a group of 51 emmetropic subjects to determine both motor and sensory ocular dominance. For analysis, patients were divided into two groups according to age. Normal ophthalmologic examination results were the inclusion requirement, with normal binocular vision and good stereoacuity.

RESULTS

A significant percentage of uncertain or ambiguous results in all tests performed was found, except in the hole-in-card and kaleidoscope tests. When the tests were compared, two by two, the correlation or equivalence found was low and was much lower if tests were compared three by three.

CONCLUSIONS

No clear ocular dominance was found in most studied subjects; instead, there must be a constant alternating balance between both eyes in most emmetropic persons, but not in those with pathologic features. This fact would explain the great variability both between and within different kinds of tests. Also, it would establish that the monovision technique is well tolerated in most patients, with unsuccessful results only in those patients with strong or clear dominance. Consequently, it seems appropriate to evaluate patient's dominance before monovision surgery to exclude those individuals with clear dominance.

摘要

目的

分析正视眼正常受试者对不同眼优势测试的反应,并分析这种反应在手术诱导单眼视中的影响。

设计

进行了一项诊断准确性的前瞻性研究,以分析不同的测试来确定眼优势,没有金标准测试。

方法

对51名正视眼受试者进行了9种不同的测试,以确定运动性和感觉性眼优势。为了进行分析,根据年龄将患者分为两组。纳入标准为眼科检查结果正常,双眼视力正常且立体视敏锐度良好。

结果

除了卡片孔测试和万花筒测试外,在所有进行的测试中都发现了相当比例的不确定或模糊结果。当对测试进行两两比较时,发现的相关性或等效性较低,如果进行三三比较则更低。

结论

在大多数研究对象中未发现明确的眼优势;相反,在大多数正视眼中,两眼之间必须存在持续的交替平衡,但有病理特征的人除外。这一事实可以解释不同类型测试之间以及测试内部的巨大变异性。此外,这将表明单眼视技术在大多数患者中耐受性良好,只有那些具有强烈或明确优势的患者才会出现不成功的结果。因此,在进行单眼视手术前评估患者的优势似乎是合适的,以排除那些具有明确优势的个体。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验