Klinische Monatsblatter fur Augenheilkunde · 1991
[Results of full binocular correction versus conventional methods].
Аннотация на английскомСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Pestalozzi D
Аннотация
UNLABELLED: 163 patients suffering from different serious troubles were treated with binocular full correction (BFC) i.e. examination by Polatest and prismatic correction. Before, they all had seen other ophthalmologists. The former diagnose and therapy are listed and compared with those of the author.
RESULTS: After a 2 2/3 years average follow-up period 68% of the patients were complaintless, 23% felt better. All patients reached at least binocular single vision, although initially 13% had no binocular vision and 1% complained about diplopia. 70% got ideal binocular vision (initially 0%). In the beginning 50 patients suffered from reduced visual acuity. It improved in all cases with differences of v.a. from 2-4/10 to 10/10. From the shown results the author concludes that conventional binocular diagnostic and therapeutic methods do no longer meet the state of the art. It is postulated that BFC should be accepted by school-medicine and that ophthalmologists and orthoptists should be trained in BFC. Only in this way ophthalmologists may fulfil their task to free patients from the many complaints caused by binocular troubles. The used terminology about BFC is explained in the appendix.
RESULTS: After a 2 2/3 years average follow-up period 68% of the patients were complaintless, 23% felt better. All patients reached at least binocular single vision, although initially 13% had no binocular vision and 1% complained about diplopia. 70% got ideal binocular vision (initially 0%). In the beginning 50 patients suffered from reduced visual acuity. It improved in all cases with differences of v.a. from 2-4/10 to 10/10. From the shown results the author concludes that conventional binocular diagnostic and therapeutic methods do no longer meet the state of the art. It is postulated that BFC should be accepted by school-medicine and that ophthalmologists and orthoptists should be trained in BFC. Only in this way ophthalmologists may fulfil their task to free patients from the many complaints caused by binocular troubles. The used terminology about BFC is explained in the appendix.