Cover image of the article: Comparison of measured heterophoria with objective and subjective methods with attention to motor eye dominancy

Image Credit:Zahedan J Res Med Sci

Comparison of measured heterophoria with objective and subjective methods with attention to motor eye dominancy

Authors

Hamed Momeni-Moghaddam 1,*, Farshad Asgarizadeh2, Marzieh Ehsani3, Hossein Ansari4, batool Haghighi5
1Instructor of Optometry, Health Promotion Research Center, School of Rehabilitation, Zahedan University of Medical Sciences and Health Services, Zahedan, Iran.
2MSc of Optometry, Tehran University of Medical Sciences and Health Services, Tehran, Iran
3BSc of Optometry, School of Rehabilitation, Zahedan University of Medical Sciences and Health Services, Zahedan, Iran.
4Instructor of Epidemiology, Health Promotion Research Center, School of Health, Zahedan University of Medical Sciences and Health Services, Zahedan, Iran.
5MSc of Optometry, Tehran University of Medical Sciences and Health Services, Tehran, Iran.
*Corresponding Author: Instructor of Optometry, Health Promotion Research Center, School of Rehabilitation, Zahedan University of Medical Sciences and Health Services, Zahedan, Iran. Email: hmomeni_opt@yahoo.com

Zahedan Journal of Research in Medical Sciences:Vol. 13, issue 7; e93818
Published online:May 26, 2011
Article type:Research Article
Received:Aug 31, 2010
Accepted:Oct 19, 2010
How to Cite:Momeni-Moghaddam H, Asgarizadeh F, Ehsani M, Ansari H, Haghighi B. Comparison of measured heterophoria with objective and subjective methods with attention to motor eye dominancy. Zahedan J Res Med Sci. 2011;13(7):e93818. doi:

Abstract

Background: The one step in evaluation of binocular vision is determination of type and amount of deviation. For this purpose objective and subjective methods were used. The purpose of this study is was to compare the measured heterophoria with objective (cover test) and subjective methods (von Graefe, Maddox rod, phi phenomenon) considering motor dominancy.

Materials and Method: In this semi-experimental study, 100 students of Zahedan University of medical sciences who had inclusion criteria, selected, randomly. Refractive errors and dominant eye were determined by retinoscopy and hole in the card test, respectively. The deviation was measured objectively by using alternate prism cover test and subjectively by von Graefe, Maddox rod and phi phenomenon tests so dominant and nondominant eye were fixed alternatively. Data were analyzed in SPSS-15 software using repeated measurement of ANOVA and correlation tests.

Results: There were considerable statistical difference between different measurement methods considering the dominancy of fixator eye (p<0.001). In the correlation test, the most and least correlations were related to phi phenomenon (dominant eye fixator) and phi phenomenon (non dominant eye fixator) and von Graefe and phi phenomenon (with dominant eye fixator), respectively.

 Conclusion: The most accurate heterophoria measurement methods were phi phenomenon, cover test, Maddox rod and von Graefe, respectively. Although accuracy of phi phenomenon was more than other methods in determination of deviation, because subjective methods cannot be used in all conditions, cover test is the best method in measuring eye deviation. Also, measured deviations in all of methods were lower when dominant eye was fixator.

Highlights

Fulltext

The full text of this article is available on the PDF file.

References

  • 1.
    The References of this article are available on the PDF file.

Copyright

© 2011, Author(s). This open-access article is available under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0) International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which allows for unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided that the original work is properly cited.

Similar Articles

15
Feb
2006
Comparison of the correlation between refractive errors (myopia  hyperopia) with stereopsis

Comparison of the correlation between refractive errors (myopia hyperopia) with stereopsis

AliReza Ashtari,
Aliakbar Mortazavi,
MohsenNoroz Aliyaei

Ashtari A, Mortazavi A, Aliyaei M. Comparison of the correlation between refractive errors (myopia hyperopia) with stereopsis. koomesh. 2006;7(1):e152078. doi:

10
Mar
2007
The Study of relationship between binocular vision and near point of convergence while near vision

The Study of relationship between binocular vision and near point of convergence while near vision

H Moemeni,
AbbasAli Yekta,
Hossein Ansari

Moemeni H, Yekta A, Ansari H. The Study of relationship between binocular vision and near point of convergence while near vision. Zahedan J Res Med Sci. 2007;9(1):e94827. doi:

31
Dec
2000
Prevalence of Amblyopia in Bou-Ali eye clinic

Prevalence of Amblyopia in Bou-Ali eye clinic

MR Ghasemi

Ghasemi M. Prevalence of Amblyopia in Bou-Ali eye clinic. J Inflamm Dis. 2024;4(3):e154723. doi:

22
Sep
2024
Postoperative Changes of Fusional Vergence in Children Intermittent Exotropia

Postoperative Changes of Fusional Vergence in Children Intermittent Exotropia

Guohong Zhao,
Jie Hong,
Bowen Zhao,
Peipei Liu,
Meng Qi,
Jing Yu
,et al.

Zhao G, Hong J, Zhao B, Liu P, Qi M, et al. Postoperative Changes of Fusional Vergence in Children Intermittent Exotropia. Inn J Pediatr. 2024;34(6):e143575. doi: https://doi.org/10.5812/ijp-143575

31
Dec
2005
Refractive errors before and after presbyopia

Refractive errors before and after presbyopia

AA Yekta,
MH Bahraini Toosi,
H Ostadi Mogaddam,
M Afzal Aghai,
A Asadpour,
N Touhidi Moghaddam

Yekta A, Bahraini Toosi M, Ostadi Mogaddam H, Afzal Aghai M, Asadpour A, et al. Refractive errors before and after presbyopia. J Inflamm Dis. 2024;9(3):e155142. doi:

More by these authors

Hamed Momeni-MoghaddamPubMedScholar
Farshad AsgarizadehPubMedScholar
Marzieh EhsaniPubMedScholar
Hossein AnsariPubMedScholar
batool HaghighiPubMedScholar
Share
Cited by
Metrics