Ángel García-Muñoz1, Stela Carbonell-Bonete2, Pilar Cacho-Martínez2. 1. Departamento de Óptica, Farmacología y Anatomía, Universidad de Alicante, Spain. Electronic address: ag.munoz@ua.es. 2. Departamento de Óptica, Farmacología y Anatomía, Universidad de Alicante, Spain.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To determine the symptoms associated with accommodative and non-strabismic binocular dysfunctions and to assess the methods used to obtain the subjects' symptoms. METHODS: We conducted a scoping review of articles published between 1988 and 2012 that analysed any aspect of the symptomatology associated with accommodative and non-strabismic binocular dysfunctions. The literature search was performed in Medline (PubMed), CINAHL, PsycINFO and FRANCIS. A total of 657 articles were identified, and 56 met the inclusion criteria. RESULTS: We found 267 different ways of naming the symptoms related to these anomalies, which we grouped into 34 symptom categories. Of the 56 studies, 35 employed questionnaires and 21 obtained the symptoms from clinical histories. We found 11 questionnaires, of which only 3 had been validated: the convergence insufficiency symptom survey (CISS V-15) and CIRS parent version, both specific for convergence insufficiency, and the Conlon survey, developed for visual anomalies in general. The most widely used questionnaire (21 studies) was the CISS V-15. Of the 34 categories of symptoms, the most frequently mentioned were: headache, blurred vision, diplopia, visual fatigue, and movement or flicker of words at near vision, which were fundamentally related to near vision and binocular anomalies. CONCLUSIONS: There is a wide disparity of symptoms related to accommodative and binocular dysfunctions in the scientific literature, most of which are associated with near vision and binocular dysfunctions. The only psychometrically validated questionnaires that we found (n=3) were related to convergence insufficiency and to visual dysfunctions in general and there no specific questionnaires for other anomalies.
PURPOSE: To determine the symptoms associated with accommodative and non-strabismic binocular dysfunctions and to assess the methods used to obtain the subjects' symptoms. METHODS: We conducted a scoping review of articles published between 1988 and 2012 that analysed any aspect of the symptomatology associated with accommodative and non-strabismic binocular dysfunctions. The literature search was performed in Medline (PubMed), CINAHL, PsycINFO and FRANCIS. A total of 657 articles were identified, and 56 met the inclusion criteria. RESULTS: We found 267 different ways of naming the symptoms related to these anomalies, which we grouped into 34 symptom categories. Of the 56 studies, 35 employed questionnaires and 21 obtained the symptoms from clinical histories. We found 11 questionnaires, of which only 3 had been validated: the convergence insufficiency symptom survey (CISS V-15) and CIRS parent version, both specific for convergence insufficiency, and the Conlon survey, developed for visual anomalies in general. The most widely used questionnaire (21 studies) was the CISS V-15. Of the 34 categories of symptoms, the most frequently mentioned were: headache, blurred vision, diplopia, visual fatigue, and movement or flicker of words at near vision, which were fundamentally related to near vision and binocular anomalies. CONCLUSIONS: There is a wide disparity of symptoms related to accommodative and binocular dysfunctions in the scientific literature, most of which are associated with near vision and binocular dysfunctions. The only psychometrically validated questionnaires that we found (n=3) were related to convergence insufficiency and to visual dysfunctions in general and there no specific questionnaires for other anomalies.
Authors: Mitchell Scheiman; Susan Cotter; Marjean Taylor Kulp; G Lynn Mitchell; Jeffrey Cooper; Michael Gallaway; Kristine B Hopkins; Mary Bartuccio; Ida Chung Journal: Optom Vis Sci Date: 2011-11 Impact factor: 1.973
Authors: Eric J Borsting; Michael W Rouse; G Lynn Mitchell; Mitchell Scheiman; Susan A Cotter; Jeffrey Cooper; Marjean Taylor Kulp; Richard London Journal: Optom Vis Sci Date: 2003-12 Impact factor: 1.973
Authors: Carmen Barnhardt; Susan A Cotter; G Lynn Mitchell; Mitchell Scheiman; Marjean T Kulp Journal: Optom Vis Sci Date: 2012-10 Impact factor: 1.973
Authors: Amy L Davis; Erin M Harvey; J Daniel Twelker; Joseph M Miller; Tina Leonard-Green; Irene Campus Journal: J Ophthalmol Date: 2016-07-20 Impact factor: 1.909