Budai Anna, Czigler András, Mikó-Baráth Eszter, Nemes Vanda A, Horváth Gábor, Pusztai Ágota, Piñero David P, Jandó Gábor
Institute of Physiology, University of Pécs, Medical School, Szigeti út 12., Pécs, 7624, Hungary.
Department of Ophthalmology, University of Pécs, Medical School, Rákóczi út 2., Pécs, 7623, Hungary.
Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2019 Feb;257(2):413-423. doi: 10.1007/s00417-018-4147-x. Epub 2018 Oct 3.
Stereo vision tests are widely used in the clinical practice for screening amblyopia and amblyogenic conditions. According to literature, none of these tests seems to be suitable to be used alone as a simple and reliable tool. There has been a growing interest in developing new types of stereo vision tests, with sufficient sensitivity to detect amblyopia. This new generation of assessment tools should be computer based, and their reliability must be statistically warranted. The present study reports the clinical evaluation of a screening system based on random dot stereograms using a tablet as display. Specifically, a dynamic random dot stereotest with binocularly detectable Snellen-E optotype (DRDSE) was used and compared with the Lang II stereotest.
A total of 141 children (aged 4-14, mean age 8.9) were examined in a field study at the Department of Ophthalmology, Pécs, Hungary. Inclusion criteria consisted of diagnoses of amblyopia, anisometropia, convergent strabismus, and hyperopia. Children with no ophthalmic pathologies were also enrolled as controls. All subjects went through a regular pediatric ophthalmological examination before proceeding to the DRDSE and Lang II tests.
DRDSE and Lang II tests were compared in terms of sensitivity and specificity for different conditions. DRDSE had a 100% sensitivity both for amblyopia (n = 11) and convergent strabismus (n = 21), as well as a 75% sensitivity for hyperopia (n = 36). However, the performance of DRDSE was not statistically significant when screening for anisometropia. On the other hand, Lang II proved to have 81.8% sensitivity for amblyopia, 80.9% for strabismus, and only 52.8% for hyperopia. The specificity of DRDSE was 61.2% for amblyopia, 67.3% for strabismus, and 68.6% for hyperopia, respectively. Conversely, Lang II showed about 10% better specificity, 73.8% for amblyopia, 79.2% for strabismus, and 77.9% for hyperopia.
The DRDSE test has a better sensitivity for the detection of conditions such as amblyopia or convergent strabismus compared with Lang II, although with slightly lower specificity. If the specificity could be further improved by optimization of the stimulus parameters, while keeping the sensitivity high, DRDSE would be a promising stereo vision test for screening of amblyopia.
立体视觉测试在临床实践中广泛用于筛查弱视及致弱视情况。据文献报道,这些测试似乎都不适宜单独用作简单可靠的工具。开发新型立体视觉测试的兴趣与日俱增,这类测试需具备足够的灵敏度以检测弱视。新一代评估工具应基于计算机,其可靠性必须有统计学依据。本研究报告了一种以平板电脑为显示屏、基于随机点立体图的筛查系统的临床评估。具体而言,使用了一种带有双眼可检测的斯内伦 - E视标的动态随机点立体测试(DRDSE),并与朗 II 立体测试进行比较。
在匈牙利佩奇市眼科进行的一项现场研究中,共检查了141名儿童(年龄4 - 14岁,平均年龄8.9岁)。纳入标准包括弱视、屈光参差、共同性斜视和远视的诊断。无眼部病变的儿童也作为对照纳入。所有受试者在进行DRDSE和朗 II 测试之前都接受了常规的儿科眼科检查。
比较了DRDSE和朗 II 在不同情况下的敏感性和特异性。DRDSE对弱视(n = 11)和共同性斜视(n = 21)的敏感性均为100%,对远视(n = 36)的敏感性为75%。然而,在筛查屈光参差时,DRDSE的表现无统计学意义。另一方面,朗 II 对弱视的敏感性为81.8%,对斜视的敏感性为80.9%,对远视的敏感性仅为52.8%。DRDSE对弱视的特异性分别为61.2%,对斜视的特异性为67.3%,对远视的特异性为68.6%。相反,朗 II 的特异性约高10%,对弱视的特异性为73.8%,对斜视的特异性为79.2%,对远视的特异性为77.9%。
与朗 II 相比,DRDSE测试在检测弱视或共同性斜视等情况时具有更好的敏感性,尽管特异性略低。如果通过优化刺激参数在保持高敏感性的同时进一步提高特异性,DRDSE将是一种很有前景的用于筛查弱视的立体视觉测试。