Arquivos brasileiros de oftalmologia · 2016
Pattern-reversal visual evoked potentials as a diagnostic tool for ocular malingering.
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.
Soares Tarciana de Souza, Sacai Paula Yuri, Berezovsky Adriana, Rocha Daniel Martins, Watanabe Sung Eun Song, Salomão Solange Rios
Аннотация
PURPOSE:: To investigate the contributions of transient pattern-reversal visual evoked potentials in the diagnosis of ocular malingering at a Brazilian university hospital.
METHODS:: Adult patients with suspected malingering in one or both eyes were referred for visual evoked potential testing. Data from patients' medical records were reviewed and analyzed retrospectively. Data analysis included the distance optotype visual acuity based on a ETDRS retro-illuminated chart and the transient pattern-reversal visual evoked potential parameters of latency (milliseconds) and amplitude (microvolts) for the P100 component, using checkerboards with visual subtenses of 15' and 60'. Motivations for malingering were noted.
RESULTS:: The 20 subjects included 11 (55%) women. Patient ages ranged from 21 to 61 years (mean= 45.05 ± 11.76 years; median= 49 years). In 8 patients (6 women), both eyes exhibited reduced visual acuity with normal pattern-reversal visually evoked potential parameters (pure malingerers). The remaining 12 patients (7 men) exhibited reduced vision in only 1 eye, with simulated reduced vision in the contralateral eye (exaggerators). Financial motivation was noted in 18 patients (9 men).
CONCLUSION:: Normal pattern-reversal visually evoked potential parameters with suspected ocular malingering were observed in a 20 patient cohort. This electrophysiological technique appeared to be useful as a measure of visual pathway integrity in this specific population.
METHODS:: Adult patients with suspected malingering in one or both eyes were referred for visual evoked potential testing. Data from patients' medical records were reviewed and analyzed retrospectively. Data analysis included the distance optotype visual acuity based on a ETDRS retro-illuminated chart and the transient pattern-reversal visual evoked potential parameters of latency (milliseconds) and amplitude (microvolts) for the P100 component, using checkerboards with visual subtenses of 15' and 60'. Motivations for malingering were noted.
RESULTS:: The 20 subjects included 11 (55%) women. Patient ages ranged from 21 to 61 years (mean= 45.05 ± 11.76 years; median= 49 years). In 8 patients (6 women), both eyes exhibited reduced visual acuity with normal pattern-reversal visually evoked potential parameters (pure malingerers). The remaining 12 patients (7 men) exhibited reduced vision in only 1 eye, with simulated reduced vision in the contralateral eye (exaggerators). Financial motivation was noted in 18 patients (9 men).
CONCLUSION:: Normal pattern-reversal visually evoked potential parameters with suspected ocular malingering were observed in a 20 patient cohort. This electrophysiological technique appeared to be useful as a measure of visual pathway integrity in this specific population.