Creating consistency in the diagnosis of convergence insufficiency: screening methods

To determine the sensitivity of various clinical tests in the diagnosis of convergence insufficiency. A total of 254 patients were recruited with complaints consistent with convergence problems but no prior history of strabismus surgery, eye exercises, prism use, recent concussion, or other ocular o...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of AAPOS 2023-12, Vol.27 (6), p.346.e1-346.e6
Hauptverfasser: Lavrich, Judith B, Hamburger, Jordan L, Lee, Karen E, Thuma, Tobin B T, Omega, Michelle L, Zhang, Qiang Ed, Gunton, Kammi B
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 346.e6
container_issue 6
container_start_page 346.e1
container_title Journal of AAPOS
container_volume 27
creator Lavrich, Judith B
Hamburger, Jordan L
Lee, Karen E
Thuma, Tobin B T
Omega, Michelle L
Zhang, Qiang Ed
Gunton, Kammi B
description To determine the sensitivity of various clinical tests in the diagnosis of convergence insufficiency. A total of 254 patients were recruited with complaints consistent with convergence problems but no prior history of strabismus surgery, eye exercises, prism use, recent concussion, or other ocular or neurological diseases. Each patient completed the convergence insufficiency symptom survey (CISS), and the following data were collected: ocular alignment at distance and near, convergence and divergence fusional amplitudes at distance and near, near-point of convergence (NPC) using an accommodative target and red lens, and assessment of quality of convergence movement (QoCM) and quality of fusional movements (QoFM). The sensitivity of each clinical test was calculated. Measurement of NPC using red lens and subjective assessment of the QoCM and QoFM were the most sensitive diagnostic tools for near symptoms consistent with convergence insufficiency: 93.3%, 98.4%, and 94.5% respectively. CISS score, convergence fusional amplitude at near, and exophoria at near had lower sensitivities: 62.9%, 46.0%, and 72.0%, respectively. Although the majority of our patients had a heterophoria or heterotropia at distance (96.8%) and/or near (98.8%), most presented with only small phorias. Furthermore, of those who had a deviation at near, only 22% had the near exophoria exceeding the distance exophoria by 10 . In our study cohort, NPC with red lens and subjective assessment of QoCM and QoFM proved to be the most sensitive screening tools for near symptoms consistent with convergence insufficiency.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.jaapos.2023.08.019
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2886938364</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2886938364</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c307t-c775ae98b5a0ba2ea4c75481ddca878d3b4a8b9563ad21c9bc1a681e907a12173</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNo9kE1Lw0AQhhdRbK3-A5EcvSTuZJPsrjcpfkHBiz0vk82k3dBkazYV-u9NqHqaYd6PgYexW-AJcCgemqRB3PuQpDwVCVcJB33G5pCnKhZaiPNx5xpilQuYsasQGs55oQEu2UxILUAJNWfrZU84uG4TWd8FFwbq7DFyXTRsKaocbjo_XiNfT_o39ZtRp1EPh7p21k3uxyjYnqibSloatr4K1-yixl2gm9-5YOuX58_lW7z6eH1fPq1iK7gcYitljqRVmSMvMSXMrMwzBVVlUUlViTJDVeq8EFilYHVpAQsFpLlESEGKBbs_9e57_3WgMJjWBUu7HXbkD8GkShVaKFFkozU7WW3vQ-ipNvvetdgfDXAzATWNOQE1E1DDlRmBjrG73w-HsqXqP_RHUPwAQjN1IA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2886938364</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Creating consistency in the diagnosis of convergence insufficiency: screening methods</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>Lavrich, Judith B ; Hamburger, Jordan L ; Lee, Karen E ; Thuma, Tobin B T ; Omega, Michelle L ; Zhang, Qiang Ed ; Gunton, Kammi B</creator><creatorcontrib>Lavrich, Judith B ; Hamburger, Jordan L ; Lee, Karen E ; Thuma, Tobin B T ; Omega, Michelle L ; Zhang, Qiang Ed ; Gunton, Kammi B</creatorcontrib><description>To determine the sensitivity of various clinical tests in the diagnosis of convergence insufficiency. A total of 254 patients were recruited with complaints consistent with convergence problems but no prior history of strabismus surgery, eye exercises, prism use, recent concussion, or other ocular or neurological diseases. Each patient completed the convergence insufficiency symptom survey (CISS), and the following data were collected: ocular alignment at distance and near, convergence and divergence fusional amplitudes at distance and near, near-point of convergence (NPC) using an accommodative target and red lens, and assessment of quality of convergence movement (QoCM) and quality of fusional movements (QoFM). The sensitivity of each clinical test was calculated. Measurement of NPC using red lens and subjective assessment of the QoCM and QoFM were the most sensitive diagnostic tools for near symptoms consistent with convergence insufficiency: 93.3%, 98.4%, and 94.5% respectively. CISS score, convergence fusional amplitude at near, and exophoria at near had lower sensitivities: 62.9%, 46.0%, and 72.0%, respectively. Although the majority of our patients had a heterophoria or heterotropia at distance (96.8%) and/or near (98.8%), most presented with only small phorias. Furthermore, of those who had a deviation at near, only 22% had the near exophoria exceeding the distance exophoria by 10 . In our study cohort, NPC with red lens and subjective assessment of QoCM and QoFM proved to be the most sensitive screening tools for near symptoms consistent with convergence insufficiency.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1091-8531</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1528-3933</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.jaapos.2023.08.019</identifier><identifier>PMID: 37931838</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States</publisher><subject>Accommodation, Ocular ; Convergence, Ocular ; Exotropia ; Humans ; Ocular Motility Disorders - diagnosis ; Strabismus ; Surveys and Questionnaires ; Vision, Binocular</subject><ispartof>Journal of AAPOS, 2023-12, Vol.27 (6), p.346.e1-346.e6</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 2023 American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c307t-c775ae98b5a0ba2ea4c75481ddca878d3b4a8b9563ad21c9bc1a681e907a12173</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c307t-c775ae98b5a0ba2ea4c75481ddca878d3b4a8b9563ad21c9bc1a681e907a12173</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27903,27904</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37931838$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Lavrich, Judith B</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hamburger, Jordan L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lee, Karen E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Thuma, Tobin B T</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Omega, Michelle L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zhang, Qiang Ed</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gunton, Kammi B</creatorcontrib><title>Creating consistency in the diagnosis of convergence insufficiency: screening methods</title><title>Journal of AAPOS</title><addtitle>J AAPOS</addtitle><description>To determine the sensitivity of various clinical tests in the diagnosis of convergence insufficiency. A total of 254 patients were recruited with complaints consistent with convergence problems but no prior history of strabismus surgery, eye exercises, prism use, recent concussion, or other ocular or neurological diseases. Each patient completed the convergence insufficiency symptom survey (CISS), and the following data were collected: ocular alignment at distance and near, convergence and divergence fusional amplitudes at distance and near, near-point of convergence (NPC) using an accommodative target and red lens, and assessment of quality of convergence movement (QoCM) and quality of fusional movements (QoFM). The sensitivity of each clinical test was calculated. Measurement of NPC using red lens and subjective assessment of the QoCM and QoFM were the most sensitive diagnostic tools for near symptoms consistent with convergence insufficiency: 93.3%, 98.4%, and 94.5% respectively. CISS score, convergence fusional amplitude at near, and exophoria at near had lower sensitivities: 62.9%, 46.0%, and 72.0%, respectively. Although the majority of our patients had a heterophoria or heterotropia at distance (96.8%) and/or near (98.8%), most presented with only small phorias. Furthermore, of those who had a deviation at near, only 22% had the near exophoria exceeding the distance exophoria by 10 . In our study cohort, NPC with red lens and subjective assessment of QoCM and QoFM proved to be the most sensitive screening tools for near symptoms consistent with convergence insufficiency.</description><subject>Accommodation, Ocular</subject><subject>Convergence, Ocular</subject><subject>Exotropia</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Ocular Motility Disorders - diagnosis</subject><subject>Strabismus</subject><subject>Surveys and Questionnaires</subject><subject>Vision, Binocular</subject><issn>1091-8531</issn><issn>1528-3933</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNo9kE1Lw0AQhhdRbK3-A5EcvSTuZJPsrjcpfkHBiz0vk82k3dBkazYV-u9NqHqaYd6PgYexW-AJcCgemqRB3PuQpDwVCVcJB33G5pCnKhZaiPNx5xpilQuYsasQGs55oQEu2UxILUAJNWfrZU84uG4TWd8FFwbq7DFyXTRsKaocbjo_XiNfT_o39ZtRp1EPh7p21k3uxyjYnqibSloatr4K1-yixl2gm9-5YOuX58_lW7z6eH1fPq1iK7gcYitljqRVmSMvMSXMrMwzBVVlUUlViTJDVeq8EFilYHVpAQsFpLlESEGKBbs_9e57_3WgMJjWBUu7HXbkD8GkShVaKFFkozU7WW3vQ-ipNvvetdgfDXAzATWNOQE1E1DDlRmBjrG73w-HsqXqP_RHUPwAQjN1IA</recordid><startdate>202312</startdate><enddate>202312</enddate><creator>Lavrich, Judith B</creator><creator>Hamburger, Jordan L</creator><creator>Lee, Karen E</creator><creator>Thuma, Tobin B T</creator><creator>Omega, Michelle L</creator><creator>Zhang, Qiang Ed</creator><creator>Gunton, Kammi B</creator><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>202312</creationdate><title>Creating consistency in the diagnosis of convergence insufficiency: screening methods</title><author>Lavrich, Judith B ; Hamburger, Jordan L ; Lee, Karen E ; Thuma, Tobin B T ; Omega, Michelle L ; Zhang, Qiang Ed ; Gunton, Kammi B</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c307t-c775ae98b5a0ba2ea4c75481ddca878d3b4a8b9563ad21c9bc1a681e907a12173</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><topic>Accommodation, Ocular</topic><topic>Convergence, Ocular</topic><topic>Exotropia</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Ocular Motility Disorders - diagnosis</topic><topic>Strabismus</topic><topic>Surveys and Questionnaires</topic><topic>Vision, Binocular</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Lavrich, Judith B</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hamburger, Jordan L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lee, Karen E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Thuma, Tobin B T</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Omega, Michelle L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zhang, Qiang Ed</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gunton, Kammi B</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of AAPOS</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Lavrich, Judith B</au><au>Hamburger, Jordan L</au><au>Lee, Karen E</au><au>Thuma, Tobin B T</au><au>Omega, Michelle L</au><au>Zhang, Qiang Ed</au><au>Gunton, Kammi B</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Creating consistency in the diagnosis of convergence insufficiency: screening methods</atitle><jtitle>Journal of AAPOS</jtitle><addtitle>J AAPOS</addtitle><date>2023-12</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>27</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>346.e1</spage><epage>346.e6</epage><pages>346.e1-346.e6</pages><issn>1091-8531</issn><eissn>1528-3933</eissn><abstract>To determine the sensitivity of various clinical tests in the diagnosis of convergence insufficiency. A total of 254 patients were recruited with complaints consistent with convergence problems but no prior history of strabismus surgery, eye exercises, prism use, recent concussion, or other ocular or neurological diseases. Each patient completed the convergence insufficiency symptom survey (CISS), and the following data were collected: ocular alignment at distance and near, convergence and divergence fusional amplitudes at distance and near, near-point of convergence (NPC) using an accommodative target and red lens, and assessment of quality of convergence movement (QoCM) and quality of fusional movements (QoFM). The sensitivity of each clinical test was calculated. Measurement of NPC using red lens and subjective assessment of the QoCM and QoFM were the most sensitive diagnostic tools for near symptoms consistent with convergence insufficiency: 93.3%, 98.4%, and 94.5% respectively. CISS score, convergence fusional amplitude at near, and exophoria at near had lower sensitivities: 62.9%, 46.0%, and 72.0%, respectively. Although the majority of our patients had a heterophoria or heterotropia at distance (96.8%) and/or near (98.8%), most presented with only small phorias. Furthermore, of those who had a deviation at near, only 22% had the near exophoria exceeding the distance exophoria by 10 . In our study cohort, NPC with red lens and subjective assessment of QoCM and QoFM proved to be the most sensitive screening tools for near symptoms consistent with convergence insufficiency.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pmid>37931838</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.jaapos.2023.08.019</doi></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1091-8531
ispartof Journal of AAPOS, 2023-12, Vol.27 (6), p.346.e1-346.e6
issn 1091-8531
1528-3933
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2886938364
source MEDLINE; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals
subjects Accommodation, Ocular
Convergence, Ocular
Exotropia
Humans
Ocular Motility Disorders - diagnosis
Strabismus
Surveys and Questionnaires
Vision, Binocular
title Creating consistency in the diagnosis of convergence insufficiency: screening methods
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-23T02%3A16%3A32IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Creating%20consistency%20in%20the%20diagnosis%20of%20convergence%20insufficiency:%20screening%20methods&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20AAPOS&rft.au=Lavrich,%20Judith%20B&rft.date=2023-12&rft.volume=27&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=346.e1&rft.epage=346.e6&rft.pages=346.e1-346.e6&rft.issn=1091-8531&rft.eissn=1528-3933&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.jaapos.2023.08.019&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2886938364%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2886938364&rft_id=info:pmid/37931838&rfr_iscdi=true