Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “ORTHOPTICS”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 1,189 records · Page 66Linked to original sources
PubMed1980

Experience with the CAM vision stimulator: preliminary report.

Eighty-four children with at least 2 lines of amblyopia were treated with the CAM vision stimulator. 91% of the children who had received no previous amblyopia therapy showed improvement, 73% achieving 6/12 vision or better. Of children in whom previous occlusion therapy had failed 73.8% improved. The treatment appears to be effective, rapid, and well tolerated. Our initial impressions have been sufficiently favourable to stimulate further clinical evaluation.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1982

Diagnosis of dyslexia by means of a new indicator of eye dominance.

Many dyslexic children are unable accurately to control the movements of their eyes even when they are not trying to read. This immaturity helps to explain their visual confusions. It may result from failure to develop dependable associations between retinal and ocular motor signals these are essential to fix the true, as opposed to retinotopic, locations of objects in the outside world. We have used a new test to study retinal/ocular motor correspondence in dyslexic children and age/IQ matched normal readers. Over half the dyslexics showed unstable ocular motor dominance.

Child↗
PubMed1990

When is it safe to stop patching?

Prior reports indicate that about half of amblyopia patients successfully treated with occlusion subsequently require maintenance patching. This retrospective study was designed to discover what clinical characteristics might be associated with a stable outcome following primary occlusion. Included were 188 patients who: (1) had amblyopia related to strabismus, anisometropia or media opacity; and (2) were followed up for at least one year after successful primary occlusion. Patients who did not comply with treatment or who did not achieve equal vision were excluded. Their ages ranged from 2 to 119 months (mean 29 months). Eighty-eight patients (47%) who required no further occlusion were designated the clinically stable group (CSG). The remaining 100 (53%), who subsequently needed patching because of unequal acuities, constituted the maintenance patching group (MPG). CSG patients were older at the beginning (mean 33 months) and at the end (mean 40 months) of primary occlusion than were MPG patients (means 26 and 31 months). Primary occlusion was more likely to have been discontinued because of equal recognition acuities in CSG patients, while equal fixation behaviour or preferential looking was more likely in MPG patients. Distribution of diagnoses, severity of amblyopia at presentation, and length of follow-up were similar in the two groups. Visual outcomes at last follow-up were slightly better in the CSG (p = 0.002). We conclude that, in general, patching can be safely discontinued after the third birthday. Although follow-up after primary occlusion is important to ensure stable results in all patients, preverbal children are more likely to require maintenance patching.

Age Factors↗
PubMed1996

Low vision.

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Humans↗
PubMed2002

Quantifying relative afferent pupillary defects using a Sbisa bar.

AIM: To compare the Sbisa bar (Bagolini filter bar) with neutral density filters (NDF) in quantifying relative afferent pupillary defects (RAPD). METHODS: 11 patients with a RAPD were graded and a neutral density filter bar was used to quantify the RAPD. This was repeated using the Sbisa bar. The Sbisa bar (Bagolini filter bar) is used by orthoptists to quantify density of suppression in amblyopia and is of a similar construct to NDFs. Before this clinical part of the study the luminance for each filter was measured, which enabled a direct comparison to be made. RESULTS: In the analysis of patients with RAPD a high correlation was found when comparing the Sbisa and NDF bars r = 0.95. This was statistically significant (p = <0.001). Correlation was also high when the luminance values for the filters were substituted for the clinical readings (r = 0.92; p=<0.001). CONCLUSION: The Sbisa bar is a comparable instrument to the NDF bar in measuring RAPD. Its availability in the clinical situation makes it a practical choice.

Female↗
PubMed1989

Amblyopia.

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Amblyopia↗
PubMed1991

Vision screening in preschool children: comparison of orthoptists and clinical medical officers as primary screeners.

OBJECTIVE: To see if there were differences in referral rates and abnormalities detected from two areas that were operating different preschool vision screening programmes. DESIGN: Cohort study using case notes of referrals. SETTING: Community based secondary referral centres in the county of Avon. PATIENTS: 263 referrals from a child population of 7105 in Southmead district, an area that used orthoptists as primary vision screeners; 111 referrals from a child population of 2977 in Weston-super-Mare, an area that used clinical medical officers for screening. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Amblyopia and squint detection rates, together with false positive referral rates. RESULTS: The amblyopia detection rate in Southmead district was significantly higher than in Weston-super-Mare (11/1000 children v 5/1000), as was the detection rate of squint (11/1000 v 3/1000). However, the false positive referral rate from Southmead was significantly lower than that from Weston-super-Mare (9/1000 v 23/1000). CONCLUSION: Preschool vision screening using orthoptists as primary screeners offers a more effective method of detecting visual abnormalities than using clinical medical officers.

Amblyopia↗