Literature DB >> 9644669

[Fixation disparity with the Pola pointing test: not representative for eye position under natural viewing conditions].

J Gerling1, M Ball, T Bömer, M Bach, G Kommerell.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: According to certain findings obtained with the Zeiss Polatest, H.J. Haase defined a "Fixation Disparity Type One". In this diagnosis, the "Zeigertest" is particularly important. The Zeigertest consists of a central ring presented to both eyes for fixation, a vertical clock hand presented to the right eye and two markings at the six and twelve o'clock positions presented to the left eye. All parts are surrounded by a binocularly visible frame. Subjects with a "Fixation Disparity Type One" see a misalignment between the clock hand and the peripheral markings. We investigated (1) whether the perceived misalignment correlated with an objective deviation of the eyes from orthovergence and (2) whether subjects with a "Fixation Disparity Type One" had a deviation of the eyes from orthovergence when looking at a natural, i.e., fully fusionable object. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Out of 303 medical students, 10 subjects with a "Fixation Disparity Type One" were selected and asked to indicate the perceived alignment or misalignment in the Zeigertest with a laser pointer. Two subjects without fixation disparity served as controls. The position of both eyes was recorded using the search coil technique. One of the 10 subjects with "Fixation Disparity Type One" had to be excluded due to excessive blinking. Experiment 1: In the beginning all parts of the Zeigertest were presented to both eyes (natural viewing condition). Then, the object for one of the eyes was switched off leaving the frame as the only fusional stimulus. The outcome variable was a refixation movement of the other eye. This experiment is similar to the unilateral cover test. Experiment 2: In the beginning all parts of the Zeigertest were presented to both eyes (natural viewing condition). Then, the original Zeigertest was switched on (clock hand presented only to the right eye, peripheral markings only to the left eye). The outcome variable was a change of vergence.
RESULTS: Experiment 1: A significant refixation movement did not occur in any of the subjects. Experiment 2. In all 9 subjects with "Fixation Disparity Type One" the vergence changed significantly between 2.4 and 14.9 arcmin. The change of vergence correlated significantly with the angle of the perceived misalignment between clock hand and peripheral markings.
CONCLUSION: A fixation disparity ascertained at the Zeigertest does not indicate a fixation disparity under natural viewing conditions.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9644669     DOI: 10.1055/s-2008-1034869

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Klin Monbl Augenheilkd        ISSN: 0023-2165            Impact factor:   0.700


  4 in total

Review 1.  [Dyslexia. Bases of reading. Reading-writing disorder. Ocular reading disorder].

Authors:  S Trauzettel-Klosinski; W D Schäfer; G Klosinski
Journal:  Ophthalmologe       Date:  2002-03       Impact factor: 1.059

2.  [When is the prescription of prismatic eyeglasses reasonable?].

Authors:  G Kommerell
Journal:  Ophthalmologe       Date:  2014-03       Impact factor: 1.059

3.  [Visual function in developmental dyslexia. Opthalmological and neuropsychological results].

Authors:  M Pache; P Weber; S Klumpp; P Gutzwiller; H J Kaiser
Journal:  Ophthalmologe       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 1.059

4.  Effects of Prism Eyeglasses on Objective and Subjective Fixation Disparity.

Authors:  Volkhard Schroth; Roland Joos; Wolfgang Jaschinski
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-10-02       Impact factor: 3.240

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.