Literature DB >> 21169875

A compact clinical instrument for quantifying suppression.

Joanne M Black1, Benjamin Thompson, Goro Maehara, Robert F Hess.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: We describe a compact and convenient clinical apparatus for the measurement of suppression based on a previously reported laboratory-based approach. In addition, we report and validate a novel, rapid psychophysical method for measuring suppression using this apparatus, which makes the technique more applicable to clinical practice.
METHODS: By using a Z800 dual pro head-mounted display driven by a MAC laptop, we provide dichoptic stimulation. Global motion stimuli composed of arrays of moving dots are presented to each eye. One set of dots move in a coherent direction (termed signal) whereas another set of dots move in a random direction (termed noise). To quantify performance, we measure the signal/noise ratio corresponding to a direction-discrimination threshold. Suppression is quantified by assessing the extent to which it matters which eye sees the signal and which eye sees the noise.
RESULTS: A space-saving, head-mounted display using current video technology offers an ideal solution for clinical practice. In addition, our optimized psychophysical method provided results that were in agreement with those produced using the original technique. We made measures of suppression on a group of nine adult amblyopic participants using this apparatus with both the original and new psychophysical paradigms. All participants had measurable suppression ranging from mild to severe. The two different psychophysical methods gave a strong correlation for the strength of suppression (rho = -0.83, p = 0.006).
CONCLUSION: Combining the new apparatus and new psychophysical method creates a convenient and rapid technique for parametric measurement of interocular suppression. In addition, this apparatus constitutes the ideal platform for suppressors to combine information between their eyes in a similar way to binocularly normal people. This provides a convenient way for clinicians to implement the newly proposed binocular treatment of amblyopia that is based on antisuppression training.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21169875     DOI: 10.1097/OPX.0b013e318205a162

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Optom Vis Sci        ISSN: 1040-5488            Impact factor:   1.973


  23 in total

1.  Effectiveness of a Binocular Video Game vs Placebo Video Game for Improving Visual Functions in Older Children, Teenagers, and Adults With Amblyopia: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Authors:  Tina Y Gao; Cindy X Guo; Raiju J Babu; Joanna M Black; William R Bobier; Arijit Chakraborty; Shuan Dai; Robert F Hess; Michelle Jenkins; Yannan Jiang; Lisa S Kearns; Lionel Kowal; Carly S Y Lam; Peter C K Pang; Varsha Parag; Roberto Pieri; Rajkumar Nallour Raveendren; Jayshree South; Sandra Elfride Staffieri; Angela Wadham; Natalie Walker; Benjamin Thompson
Journal:  JAMA Ophthalmol       Date:  2018-02-01       Impact factor: 7.389

2.  The measurement and treatment of suppression in amblyopia.

Authors:  Joanna M Black; Robert F Hess; Jeremy R Cooperstock; Long To; Benjamin Thompson
Journal:  J Vis Exp       Date:  2012-12-14       Impact factor: 1.355

3.  Transcranial direct current stimulation enhances recovery of stereopsis in adults with amblyopia.

Authors:  Daniel P Spiegel; Jinrong Li; Robert F Hess; Winston D Byblow; Daming Deng; Minbin Yu; Benjamin Thompson
Journal:  Neurotherapeutics       Date:  2013-10       Impact factor: 7.620

4.  Discriminating anisometropic amblyopia from myopia based on interocular inhibition.

Authors:  Wuli Jia; Jiawei Zhou; Zhong-Lin Lu; Luis A Lesmes; Chang-Bing Huang
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2015-02-19       Impact factor: 1.886

5.  New treatment for amblyopia based on rules of synaptic plasticity: a randomized clinical trial.

Authors:  Xin Huang; Huika Xia; Qi Zhang; Yan Nan; Wenyao Wang; Colin Blakemore; Jie Gao; Spencer S Ng; Jing Wen; Tiejun Huang; Xiaoqing Li; Mingliang Pu
Journal:  Sci China Life Sci       Date:  2022-01-06       Impact factor: 6.038

Review 6.  Binocular versus standard occlusion or blurring treatment for unilateral amblyopia in children aged three to eight years.

Authors:  Vijay Tailor; Siobhan Ludden; Manuela Bossi; Catey Bunce; John A Greenwood; Annegret Dahlmann-Noor
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2022-02-07

7.  Assessing binocular interaction in amblyopia and its clinical feasibility.

Authors:  MiYoung Kwon; Zhong-Lin Lu; Alexandra Miller; Melanie Kazlas; David G Hunter; Peter J Bex
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-06-24       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 8.  Global processing in amblyopia: a review.

Authors:  Lisa M Hamm; Joanna Black; Shuan Dai; Benjamin Thompson
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2014-06-17

9.  Spatial-frequency dependent binocular imbalance in amblyopia.

Authors:  MiYoung Kwon; Emily Wiecek; Steven C Dakin; Peter J Bex
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2015-11-25       Impact factor: 4.379

Review 10.  Binocular versus standard occlusion or blurring treatment for unilateral amblyopia in children aged three to eight years.

Authors:  Vijay Tailor; Manuela Bossi; Catey Bunce; John A Greenwood; Annegret Dahlmann-Noor
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2015-08-11
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.