Annals of Ophthalmology

, Volume 33, Issue 3, pp 205–208 | Cite as

Prevalence of general dysfunctions in binocular vision

  • Robert Montés-Micó

Abstract

A 1-year clinical trial to determine the prevalence of general dysfunctions in binocular vision in a nonpresbyopic population was conducted in 1679 subjects aged 18 to 38 years. A thorough eye examination included binocular vision testing. A high prevalence of binocular vision dysfunctions was found. Of the subjects, 56.2% presented symptoms of binocular dysfunctions, 61.4% with accommodation disorders and 38.6% vergence disorders. Accommodation insufficiency was most prevalent among those with symptoms (11.4%).

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Hokoda SC. General binocular dysfunctions in an urban optometry clinic. J Am Optom Assoc. 1985;56:560–562.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Purcell LR, Nuffer JS, Clements SD, et al. The cost effectiveness of selected optometric procedures. J Am Optom Assoc. 1983;54:643–647.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bennett GR, Blondin M, Ruskiewicz J. Incidence and prevalence of selected visual conditions. J Am Optom Assoc. 1982;53:647–656.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Griffin JR. Binocular Anomalies: Procedures for Vision Therapy. 2nd ed. Chicago, Ill: Professional Press; 1982: chap 1.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Grisham D. The dynamics of fusional vergence eye movement in binocular dysfunction. Am J Optom Physiol Opt. 1980;57:645–655.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hoffman L, Cohen AH, Feuer G. Effectiveness of non-strabismus optometric vision training in a private practice. Am J Optom Arch Am Acad Optom. 1973;50:813–816.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Pickwel LD. Binocular Vision Anomalies: Investigation and Treatment. 2nd ed. London, England: Butterworth; 1989.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Regan D. Binocular vision. In: Regan D, ed. Vision and Visual Dysfunction. London, England: MacMillan Press; 1991:46–70.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Daum KM. Accommodative dysfunctions. Doc Ophthalmol. 1983; 55:177–198.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Daum KM. Characteristics of exodeviations: II. Changes with treatment with orthoptics. Am J Optom Physiol Opt. 1986;63:244–251.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Benjamin, WJ. Fusion and binocularity. 1st ed. In: Clinical Refraction. Philadelphia, Pa: WB Saunders Co; 1998:255–278.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Grosvenor T. Anomalies of refraction and binocular vision. In: Grosvenor T, ed. Primary Care Optometry. 3rd ed. Washington, DC: Butterworth-Heinemann; 1996.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Scheiman M, Wick B. Clinical Management of Binocular Vision: Heterophoric Accommodative, and Eye Movement Disorders. Philadelphia, Pa: JB Lippincott Co; 1994:3–31.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Humana Press Inc. 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • Robert Montés-Micó
    • 2
  1. 1.Department d'Òptica, Facultat de FisicaUniversitat de ValènciaBurjassot (València)Spain
  2. 2.Optometry and Vision Sciences Unit, Optics DepartmentUniversity of ValenciaValenciaSpain

Personalised recommendations