Department of Cognitive Neuroscience, Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behavior, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Optom Vis Sci. 2022 Sep 1;99(9):711-717. doi: 10.1097/OPX.0000000000001930. Epub 2022 Aug 2.
The Developmental Eye Movement (DEM) test, a test purported to assess oculomotor skills, does not detect eye movement disorder in nystagmus syndromes. The test should not be used for the clinical evaluation of oculomotor disorders.
The DEM test ratio compares a horizontal number naming subtest with a vertical one to identify oculomotor problems independent of a child's visual-verbal naming skills. Here, we tested the construct validity of this method by comparing scores of children with and without pathologic nystagmus. Such a nystagmus disturbs normal fixation and saccadic behavior because of the presence of involuntary rhythmic oscillations of the eyes. Therefore, if the ratio is indeed a comprehensive measure of oculomotor problems, children with nystagmus should show an increased ratio score.
The DEM test performances of normally sighted children (n = 94), children with ocular visual impairments (VI o ; n = 33), and children with cerebral visual impairment (n = 30) were analyzed using linear regression. Part of the children with VI o and cerebral visual impairment had either fusion maldevelopment nystagmus syndrome (n = 8) or infantile nystagmus syndrome (n = 20), whereas the others showed no pathologic nystagmus.
The times needed for the horizontal and vertical subtests were significantly different between children with normal vision, VI o , and cerebral visual impairment ( P < .001). However, the presence of nystagmus did not add significantly to the horizontal and vertical times ( P > .20), nor did it have an effect on the ratio ( P > .10).
The DEM test ratio is not sensitive to fixation and saccade abnormalities associated with nystagmus, indicating that it does not have general construct validity to detect true eye movement disorders. Although not suitable for the evaluation of oculomotor disorders, the subtests do have clinical relevance in the diagnosis of cerebral visual impairment.
发展性眼球运动(DEM)测试,一种据称可评估眼球运动技能的测试,无法检测眼震综合征中的眼球运动障碍。该测试不应用于眼球运动障碍的临床评估。
DEM 测试比率通过比较水平数字命名测试和垂直测试来识别眼球运动问题,而无需考虑儿童的视觉语言命名技能。在这里,我们通过比较患有和不患有病理眼震的儿童的分数来测试这种方法的结构有效性。这种眼震由于眼睛的不自主有节奏的摆动而扰乱了正常的固定和扫视行为。因此,如果该比率确实是眼球运动问题的综合衡量标准,那么患有眼震的儿童的比率得分应该会增加。
使用线性回归分析了正常视力儿童(n=94)、眼部视觉障碍儿童(VI o ;n=33)和脑性视觉障碍儿童(n=30)的 DEM 测试表现。部分患有 VI o 和脑性视觉障碍的儿童患有融合发育性眼震综合征(n=8)或婴儿性眼震综合征(n=20),而其他儿童则没有病理性眼震。
正常视力、VI o 和脑性视觉障碍儿童的水平和垂直子测试所需的时间有显著差异(P<0.001)。然而,眼震的存在并没有显著增加水平和垂直时间(P>0.20),也没有对比率产生影响(P>0.10)。
DEM 测试比率对与眼震相关的固定和扫视异常不敏感,这表明它没有普遍的结构有效性来检测真正的眼球运动障碍。尽管不适合评估眼球运动障碍,但子测试在脑性视觉障碍的诊断中具有临床相关性。