Literature DB >> 20381008

Classification and misclassification of sensory monofixation in intermittent exotropia.

Sarah R Hatt1, David A Leske, Brian G Mohney, Michael C Brodsky, Jonathan M Holmes.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The course of intermittent exotropia and response to surgery may depend on whether there is underlying monofixation. The purpose of this study was to report the prevalence of sensory monofixation in intermittent exotropia using different stereotests and to determine the risk of misclassifying monofixation based on a single administration of each test.
DESIGN: Retrospective case review of children with intermittent exotropia.
METHODS: Forty-four children were identified for whom Preschool Randot, Frisby, and Titmus stereoacuity were measured at a single examination. Ninety-two children were identified with near stereoacuity measured on 2 sequential visits (Preschool Randot, n = 73; Frisby, n = 66; and Titmus, n = 40). Monofixation was defined as stereoacuity worse than previously published age-referenced normal thresholds, bifixation was defined as at least 40 arc seconds, and uncertain was defined as within normal range for age but worse than 40 arc seconds.
RESULTS: In children measured by all 3 tests on the same visit, sensory monofixation occurred in 36% using Preschool Randot, in 48% using Titmus, and in 55% using Frisby (P > .1 for each comparison). There was poor agreement between Frisby and Preschool Randot when classifying monofixation in individual patients (P = .05). In children measured on sequential visits, misclassification occurred in 5% with Preschool Randot, in 13% with Titmus, and in 23% with Frisby (Preschool Randot vs Frisby, P = .005).
CONCLUSIONS: Classification of monofixation depends on the stereotest used. Regardless of the stereotest, there is a risk of misclassifying monofixation on a single assessment. Potential misclassification needs to be considered in clinical practice and in study design. 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20381008      PMCID: PMC2925170          DOI: 10.1016/j.ajo.2010.01.033

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Ophthalmol        ISSN: 0002-9394            Impact factor:   5.258


  20 in total

1.  Stereoacuity development in children with normal binocular single vision.

Authors:  P E Romano; J A Romano; J E Puklin
Journal:  Am J Ophthalmol       Date:  1975-06       Impact factor: 5.258

2.  The occurrence of monofixational exotropia after exotropia surgery.

Authors:  Burton J Kushner
Journal:  Am J Ophthalmol       Date:  2009-03-14       Impact factor: 5.258

3.  Monofixational intermittent exotropia.

Authors:  J D Baker; G T Davies
Journal:  Arch Ophthalmol       Date:  1979-01

4.  Distance alternate-letter suppression test for objective assessment of sensorial status in intermittent exotropia.

Authors:  C Yildirim; H I Altinsoy
Journal:  Eur J Ophthalmol       Date:  2000 Jan-Mar       Impact factor: 2.597

5.  Th monofixation syndrome.

Authors:  M M Parks
Journal:  Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc       Date:  1969

6.  Stereoscopic threshold in children and adults.

Authors:  G Heron; S Dholakia; D E Collins; H McLaughlan
Journal:  Am J Optom Physiol Opt       Date:  1985-08

7.  Stereoacuity norms in young children.

Authors:  K Simons
Journal:  Arch Ophthalmol       Date:  1981-03

8.  Comparing stereoscopic performance of children using the Titmus, TNO, and Randot stereo tests.

Authors:  J Cooper; J Feldman; D Medlin
Journal:  J Am Optom Assoc       Date:  1979-07

9.  Maximum angle of horizontal strabismus consistent with true stereopsis.

Authors:  David A Leske; Jonathan M Holmes
Journal:  J AAPOS       Date:  2004-02       Impact factor: 1.220

10.  Distance stereoacuity. Assessing control in intermittent exotropia.

Authors:  R A Stathacopoulos; A L Rosenbaum; D Zanoni; D R Stager; L C McCall; A J Ziffer; M Everett
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  1993-04       Impact factor: 12.079

View more
  8 in total

1.  Is intermittent exotropia a curable condition?

Authors:  J M Holmes; S R Hatt; D A Leske
Journal:  Eye (Lond)       Date:  2014-11-14       Impact factor: 3.775

2.  Relationship among clinical factors in childhood intermittent exotropia.

Authors:  Rosanne Superstein; Trevano W Dean; Jonathan M Holmes; Danielle L Chandler; Susan A Cotter; David K Wallace; B Michele Melia; Raymond T Kraker; R Grey Weaver; Brian G Mohney; Sean P Donahue; Eileen E Birch
Journal:  J AAPOS       Date:  2017-06-28       Impact factor: 1.220

3.  Stability of near stereoacuity in childhood intermittent exotropia.

Authors:  Jonathan M Holmes; David A Leske; Sarah R Hatt; Michael C Brodsky; Brian G Mohney
Journal:  J AAPOS       Date:  2011-10       Impact factor: 1.220

4.  Management of patients with small-angle esotropia and subnormal stereopsis using Fresnel prism.

Authors:  Haeng-Jin Lee; Seong-Joon Kim
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2021-08-18       Impact factor: 3.117

Review 5.  Interventions for intermittent exotropia.

Authors:  Yi Pang; Lawrence Gnanaraj; Jessica Gayleard; Genie Han; Sarah R Hatt
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2021-09-13

Review 6.  Interventions for intermittent exotropia.

Authors:  Sarah R Hatt; Lawrence Gnanaraj
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2013-05-31

7.  Clinical study of the effect of refractive status on stereopsis in children with intermittent exotropia.

Authors:  Dong Han; Danni Jiang; Jiahuan Zhang; Tianxu Pei; Qi Zhao
Journal:  BMC Ophthalmol       Date:  2018-06-19       Impact factor: 2.209

8.  Comparison of Surgical Outcomes with Unilateral Recession and Resection According to Angle of Deviation in Basic Intermittent Exotropia.

Authors:  Soon Young Cho; Se Youp Lee; Jong Hyun Jung
Journal:  Korean J Ophthalmol       Date:  2015-11-25
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.