Journal of optometry · 2021
Accommodative and binocular vision dysfunctions in a Portuguese clinical population.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Franco Sandra, Moreira Alexandra, Fernandes Ana, Baptista António
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Several studies have suggested that accommodative and non-strabismic binocular dysfunctions are commonly encountered in optometric practice. This study aims to verify whether these findings apply to a Portuguese clinical population.
METHODS: This study included consecutive nonpresbyopic subjects that came to two Portuguese optometric clinics over a period of six months. A complete visual exam was conducted and included the measurement of visual acuity (VA), refraction, near point of convergence (NPC), distance and near phoria, near and distance fusional vergences, amplitude of accommodation (AA), monocular accommodative facility (MAF), relative accommodation and lag of accommodation.
RESULTS: 156 subjects with a mean age of 24.9 ± 5.3 years (from 18 to 35 years old) participated in the study. Of all subjects, 32 % presented binocular vision and/or accommodative disorders accompanied or not by refractive errors. Moreover, 21.1 % had accommodative disorders, and 10.9 % had a binocular vision dysfunction. Accommodative insufficiency (11.5 %) was the most prevalent disorder, followed by convergence insufficiency (7.1 %) and accommodative infacility (5. 8 %).
CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians should be aware that about one third of the optometric clinical population could have accommodative and/or non-strabismic binocular disorders. Accommodative insufficiency was the most prevalent dysfunction presented in the studied population, followed by accommodative infacility and convergence insufficiency.
METHODS: This study included consecutive nonpresbyopic subjects that came to two Portuguese optometric clinics over a period of six months. A complete visual exam was conducted and included the measurement of visual acuity (VA), refraction, near point of convergence (NPC), distance and near phoria, near and distance fusional vergences, amplitude of accommodation (AA), monocular accommodative facility (MAF), relative accommodation and lag of accommodation.
RESULTS: 156 subjects with a mean age of 24.9 ± 5.3 years (from 18 to 35 years old) participated in the study. Of all subjects, 32 % presented binocular vision and/or accommodative disorders accompanied or not by refractive errors. Moreover, 21.1 % had accommodative disorders, and 10.9 % had a binocular vision dysfunction. Accommodative insufficiency (11.5 %) was the most prevalent disorder, followed by convergence insufficiency (7.1 %) and accommodative infacility (5. 8 %).
CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians should be aware that about one third of the optometric clinical population could have accommodative and/or non-strabismic binocular disorders. Accommodative insufficiency was the most prevalent dysfunction presented in the studied population, followed by accommodative infacility and convergence insufficiency.