Transactions from the Xth International Orthoptics Congress 2004

More documents

Recommendations

Info

N.A. 3 D 4 D 4 D 4 D Normal Normal V.M. 6 D 6 D 3 D 3 D Normal Normal D.J. 3 D 3 D 3 D 3 D Normal Normal B.M. 6 D 6 D 6 D 6 D Normal Normal Mean values 6.13 D 6.5 D 6.13 D 6.40 D Group 3 S.M. 10 D 10 D 9 D 10 D Normal Normal V.F. 12 D 12 D 10 D 10 D Normal Normal G.T. 9 D 10 D 10 D 10 D Normal Normal Y.W. 10 D 12 D 8 D 12 D Normal Normal Mean values 10.25 D 11.00 D 9.25 D 10.50 D Group 4 P.M 10 D 8 D 8 D 8 D Normal Normal V.J. 2 D 3 D 2 D 2 D Normal Normal K.C. 2 D 2 D 2 D 2 D Normal Normal L.H. 3 D 3 D 3 D 3 D Normal Normal Mean values 4.25 D 4 D 3.75 D 3.75 D Discussion None of the patients presented changes in eye position, ocular motility, fusion, stereopsis and convergence. In 30% of the patients accommodation decreased, in 16% it increased. In the majority of patients, the ability to accommodate was unchanged. The influence of frontwave aberrations differences pre and post LASEK could explain these different reactions. This will be the subject of a further study. References 1. Godts, D., Tassignon , M.J., Gobin, L. (2004). Binocular vision impairment after refractive surgery. J. Cataract Refract. Surg. 30, 101-109. 2. Nemet, P., Levinger, S., Nemet, A., (2002). Refractive surgery for refractive errors which cause strabismus. BinocularVision & Strabismus Quarterly. 17 (3): 187-190. 3. Kowal, L. (2000). Refractive surgery and diplopia. Clinical and experimental Ophthalmology 28, 344- 346. 4. Garner, L. F., Smith, G. (1997). Changes in equivalent and gradient refractive index of the crystalline lens with accommodation. Optometry and Vision Science, 74(2), 114-119. 5. Koretz, J. F., Cook, C. A., Kaufman, P. L. (2002). Aging of the human lens: Changes in lens shape upon accommodation and with accommodative loss. Journal of the Optical Society of America, 19(1), 144- 151. 6. He, J. C., Gwiazda, J., Thorn, F., Held, R., Huang, W. (2003b). Change in corneal shape and corneal wave-front aberrations with accommodation. Journal of Vision, 3(7), 456-463. 4
Assessing The Dominant Eye: A New Method To Determine Sensory Dominance During Binocular Vision Claire Emmanouilidis, Elaine Cornell, Nathan Moss The University of Sydney, School of Applied Vision Sciences Sydney, NSW, Australia e.cornell@fhs.usyd.edu.au Abstract Introduction: Monovision correction by contact lenses or laser surgery involves correcting one eye for distance vision and the other eye for near. The dominant eye is normally chosen for distance correction and a form of sighting dominance is normally used to diagnose the dominant eye. Previous research has shown that ocular dominance is task dependent, that is, it may change depending on the visual task that is assessed. As monovision results in binocular vision where each fovea is receiving images of different clarity a test that is based on retinal rivalry (such as a sensory test) may be a better predictor of success following a monovision procedure. Methods: A novel test for sensory dominance was developed that could be readily used in a clinical situation. Sighting and sensory ocular dominance were investigated in 46 subjects. A two-tailed t test was performed to compare the laterality of ocular dominance between the two tests. Results: There was no significant relationship found between the two forms of ocular dominance at either distance (p=0.124) or near (p=0.403), indicating that the response on one test could not predict the response on the second test. Conclusions: Responses of a sighting dominance test cannot predict the responses of s sensory dominance test and thus the two forms of ocular dominance can be considered as two separate entities. Keywords Ocular dominance, Monovision correction Introduction Lateralization in eye function is the result of the development of binocular vision, with the overlapping of the visual fields of the two eyes 9 . The receptive fields in the two eyes are identical for a given binocular cell of the cerebral visual cortex in terms of size, orientation, motion sensitivity, and directionality. They are also are in precisely corresponding parts of the contralateral visual field. However, the inputs from the two eyes are often not identical in their relative influence on the cortical cell. Input from one eye is usually dominant and produces a greater response to a given stimulus than the input from the other eye (1). The complex underlying physiological mechanisms of eye function make it difficult to provide a single definition that applies to all aspects of ocular dominance. Coren & Kaplan (2) concluded that ocular dominance is a multifaceted phenomenon and their analysis revealed three categories of ocular dominance (sighting, sensory, and acuity dominance) that were categorised according to the visual task required and did not necessarily relate to the same eye. 1
Page 1 and 2: ‘Global Perspectives Converge Dow
Page 9 and 10: The Burian Memorial Lecture: Factor
Page 11 and 12: Results Seventy-four patients fulfi
Page 13 and 14: three years of surgical alignment,
Page 15 and 16: onto temporal retina, regardless of
Page 17 and 18: Range of accommodation and binocula
Page 19: Table 2 Patient Preoperative fusion
Page 23 and 24: Figure 1. The Sensory Dominance Tes
Page 25 and 26: Does Dissociation Reduce Stereoacui
Page 27 and 28: Methods Observers were students in
Page 29 and 30: Initial 1.2 ** 1.4 ** 6.4 **** 7.1
Page 31 and 32: Does stereoacuity correlate with in
Page 33 and 34: Results The distance and near stere
Page 35 and 36: 3. Frisby, J.P., Davis, H., Edgar,
Page 37 and 38: measurement of sensory dominance (3
Page 39 and 40: Fig. 1. Durations of exclusive perc
Page 41 and 42: The results of all four stereotests
Page 43 and 44: varied, from 100% to 80% to 60% to
Page 45 and 46: Can stereo tests be an indicator of
Page 47 and 48: Pass No. Table 1. Number .of subjec
Page 49 and 50: Stereoacuity Following Unilateral A
Page 51 and 52: Table 1 Pre-operatively Post-operat
Page 53 and 54: Measurement And Improvement Of Visu
Page 55 and 56: Table 1 Criteria for visual skills
Page 57 and 58: Diagnosis And Treatment In Patients
Page 59 and 60: Reduction of asthenopic symptoms -
Page 61 and 62: Monovision By Implanted Intraocular
Page 63 and 64: Acknowledgements This study was sup
Page 65 and 66: The Effect Of Simulated Torsional D
Page 67 and 68: Table 3. Mean fusional convergence
Page 69 and 70: Strabismus In Childhood: Unilateral
Page 71 and 72:
12 cases present documented NRCC, 8
Page 73 and 74:
The Use Of A Computerised System Fo
Page 75 and 76:
test. The main program also monitor
Page 77 and 78:
Abstract Disruption of Binocular Vi
show all

Transactions from the Xth International Orthoptics Congress 2004

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?