Cargando…

Comparison, within-session repeatability and normative data of three phoria tests

PURPOSE: Phoria measurements form a routine part of the examination of binocular vision. Various studies have compared different methods of phoria measurement and their repeatability between sessions. However, no studies have accounted for within-session repeatability, and few norms have been availa...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Facchin, Alessio, Maffioletti, Silvio
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8258131/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32763127
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.optom.2020.05.007
_version_ 1783718444001132544
author Facchin, Alessio
Maffioletti, Silvio
author_facet Facchin, Alessio
Maffioletti, Silvio
author_sort Facchin, Alessio
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: Phoria measurements form a routine part of the examination of binocular vision. Various studies have compared different methods of phoria measurement and their repeatability between sessions. However, no studies have accounted for within-session repeatability, and few norms have been available to date. Our aims were to assess the short-term within-session repeatability, the agreement and the comparisons between three phoria tests and the delineation of normative data. METHOD: The participants comprised 315 refractive corrected participants with a normal binocular vision, with ages between 20 and 80 years. Phoria was measured using three methods: von Graefe (VG), modified Thorington (MT) and Thorighton (TH) procedures. Each measurement was taken 3 consecutive times at far and near. RESULTS: The repeatability between measurements was high (0.87 to 0.96), but the relationship between tests was medium (0.407 to 0.682). About the mean bias, VG show more exo values (0.02 to 0.14 at far and 0.07 to 0.14 at near) and MT and TH similar values (−0.04 to 0.08 at far and −0.1 to 0.03 at near). The best agreement between tests was for TH and MT (LoA = 2.33 at far and LoA = 4.44 at near). Normative data for non-presbyopic were provided. CONCLUSION: Overall, there is a high agreement between MT and TH. Conversely, VG shows more exo values at near and shows large limits of agreement. We recommend that subjective measurements of phoria can best be quantified once using the MT or TH techniques in free space and the values compared with updated norms.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8258131
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-82581312021-07-23 Comparison, within-session repeatability and normative data of three phoria tests Facchin, Alessio Maffioletti, Silvio J Optom Original Article PURPOSE: Phoria measurements form a routine part of the examination of binocular vision. Various studies have compared different methods of phoria measurement and their repeatability between sessions. However, no studies have accounted for within-session repeatability, and few norms have been available to date. Our aims were to assess the short-term within-session repeatability, the agreement and the comparisons between three phoria tests and the delineation of normative data. METHOD: The participants comprised 315 refractive corrected participants with a normal binocular vision, with ages between 20 and 80 years. Phoria was measured using three methods: von Graefe (VG), modified Thorington (MT) and Thorighton (TH) procedures. Each measurement was taken 3 consecutive times at far and near. RESULTS: The repeatability between measurements was high (0.87 to 0.96), but the relationship between tests was medium (0.407 to 0.682). About the mean bias, VG show more exo values (0.02 to 0.14 at far and 0.07 to 0.14 at near) and MT and TH similar values (−0.04 to 0.08 at far and −0.1 to 0.03 at near). The best agreement between tests was for TH and MT (LoA = 2.33 at far and LoA = 4.44 at near). Normative data for non-presbyopic were provided. CONCLUSION: Overall, there is a high agreement between MT and TH. Conversely, VG shows more exo values at near and shows large limits of agreement. We recommend that subjective measurements of phoria can best be quantified once using the MT or TH techniques in free space and the values compared with updated norms. Elsevier 2021 2020-08-04 /pmc/articles/PMC8258131/ /pubmed/32763127 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.optom.2020.05.007 Text en © 2020 Spanish General Council of Optometry. Published by Elsevier España, S.L.U. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
spellingShingle Original Article
Facchin, Alessio
Maffioletti, Silvio
Comparison, within-session repeatability and normative data of three phoria tests
title Comparison, within-session repeatability and normative data of three phoria tests
title_full Comparison, within-session repeatability and normative data of three phoria tests
title_fullStr Comparison, within-session repeatability and normative data of three phoria tests
title_full_unstemmed Comparison, within-session repeatability and normative data of three phoria tests
title_short Comparison, within-session repeatability and normative data of three phoria tests
title_sort comparison, within-session repeatability and normative data of three phoria tests
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8258131/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32763127
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.optom.2020.05.007
work_keys_str_mv AT facchinalessio comparisonwithinsessionrepeatabilityandnormativedataofthreephoriatests
AT maffiolettisilvio comparisonwithinsessionrepeatabilityandnormativedataofthreephoriatests