Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis of clinical signs for screening of convergence insufficiency in young adults


Autoři: Byeong-Yeon Moon aff001;  Sang-Yeob Kim aff001;  Dong-Sik Yu aff001
Působiště autorů: Department of Optometry, Kangwon National University, Samcheok, Korea aff001
Vyšlo v časopise: PLoS ONE 15(1)
Kategorie: Research Article
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0228313

Souhrn

Convergence insufficiency (CI) is a dysfunction of binocular vision that is associated with various signs and symptoms in near work. However, CI screening is performed less frequently in adults than in children. We aimed to evaluate the ability of screening tests to discriminate CI from other binocular vision anomalies and normal binocular vision in young adults. One hundred eighty-four university students (age, 18–28 years) who underwent an eye examination due to ocular discomfort were included. Near point of convergence (NPC), phoria, accommodative amplitude, fusional vergence, the ratio of accommodative convergence to accommodation, relative accommodation, binocular accommodative facility, vergence facility, and the values corresponding to Sheard’s and Percival’s criteria were evaluated. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis for each test was also performed. The prevalence of CI ranged from 10.3% to 21.2%, depending on the signs and the presence of CI associated with accommodative disorders. Assessments based on NPC, Sheard’s criterion, and Percival’s criterion showed high discriminative ability, with the ability being higher between the CI and normal binocular vision groups than between the CI and non-CI groups. Sheard’s criterion showed the highest diagnostic performance in discriminating CI with three signs from the non-CI group. The cut-off values were 7.2 cm for NPC, -0.23 to 1.00 for Sheard’s criterion, and -4.00 to -2.33 for Percival’s criterion. Our results suggest that the use of Sheard’s criterion with NPC shows high performance for screening of CI.

Klíčová slova:

Binocular vision – Diagnostic medicine – Eyes – Ophthalmology – Prisms – Signs and symptoms – Vision – Young adults


Zdroje

1. Cooper JS, Burns CR, Cotter SA, Daum KM, Griffin JR, Scheiman MM. Optometric clinical practice guidelines: care of the patient with accommodative and vergence dysfunctions. St Louis: American Optometric Association; 2010. pp. 4–23. https://www.aoa.org/documents/optometrists/CPG-18.pdf

2. Wick BC. Horizontal deviations. In: Amos JF, ed. Diagnosis and management in vision care. Boston: Butterworth-Heinemann; 1987. pp. 461–510.

3. García-Muñoz Á, Carbonell-Bonete S, Cacho-Martínez P. Symptomatology associated with accommodative and binocular vision anomalies. J Optom. 2014; 7: 178–192. doi: 10.1016/j.optom.2014.06.005 25323640

4. Bade A, Boas M, Gallaway M, Mitchell GL, Scheiman M, Kulp MT, et al. Relationship between clinical signs and symptoms of convergence insufficiency. Optom Vis Sci. 2013; 90: 988–995. doi: 10.1097/OPX.0000000000000012 23958713

5. Cooper J, Jamal N. Convergence insufficiency-a major review. Optometry. 2012; 83: 137–158. 23231437

6. Dwyer P. The prevalence of vergence accommodation disorders in a school-age population. Clin Exp Optom. 1992; 75: 10–18. doi: 10.1111/j.1444-0938.1992.tb01010.x

7. Paniccia SM, Ayala AR. Prevalence of accommodative and non-strabismic binocular anomalies in a Puerto Rican pediatric population. Optom Vis Perform. 2015; 3: 158–164. https://www.ovpjournal.org/uploads/2/3/8/9/23898265/ovp3-3_article_paniccia_web.pdf

8. Cacho-Martínez P, García-Muñoz Á, Ruiz-Cantero MT. Do we really know the prevalence of accomodative and nonstrabismic binocular dysfunctions? J Optom. 2010; 3: 185–197. doi: 10.1016/S1888-4296(10)70028-5

9. Menjivar AM, Kulp MT, Mitchell GL, Toole AJ, Reuter K. Screening for convergence insufficiency in school-age children. Clin Exp Optom 2018; 101: 578–584. doi: 10.1111/cxo.12661 29534348

10. Rouse M, Borsting E, Mitchell GL, Cotter SA, Kulp M, Scheiman M, et al. Validity of the convergence insufficiency symptom survey: a confirmatory study. Optom Vis Sci. 2009; 86: 357–363. doi: 10.1097/OPX.0b013e3181989252 19289977

11. Cacho-Martínez P, García-Muñoz A, Ruiz-Cantero MT. Diagnostic validity of clinical signs associated with a large exophoria at near. J Ophthalmol. 2013; 2013: 549435. doi: 10.1155/2013/549435 23997945

12. Kim YH. Binocular accommodative facility and vergence facility in university students with symptomatic convergence insufficiency. J Korean Ophthalmic Opt Soc. 2018; 23: 117–123. doi: 10.14479/jkoos.2018.23.2.117

13. Darko-Takyi C, Khan NE, Nirghin U. A review of the classification of nonstrabismic binocular vision anomalies. Optometry Reports. 2016; 5: 5626. doi: 10.4081/optometry.2016.5626

14. Cacho Martínez P, García Muñoz A, Ruiz-Cantero MT. Treatment of accommodative and nonstrabismic binocular dysfunctions: a systematic review. Optometry. 2009; 80: 702–716. doi: 10.1016/j.optm.2009.06.011 19932444

15. Scheiman M, Gallaway M, Frantz KA, Peters RJ, Hatch S, Cuff M, et al. Nearpoint of convergence: test procedure, target selection, and normative data. Optom Vis Sci. 2003; 80: 214–225. doi: 10.1097/00006324-200303000-00011 12637833

16. Maples WC, Savoy RS, Harville BJ, Golden LR, Hoenes R. Comparison of distance and near heterophoria by two clinical methods. Optom Vis Dev. 2009; 40: 100–106. https://cdn.ymaws.com/www.covd.org/resource/resmgr/ovd40-2/article_comparisonofdistance.pdf

17. Scheiman M. Wick B. Clinical management of binocular vision: heterophoric, accommodative, and eye movement disorders, 4th ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2014. pp. 36–76.

18. Tsai LH, Lin DPC, Su JKC, Chang YS, Chen ST. The effects of myopia and AC/A measuring methodology on AC/A ratio outcome. Chung Shan Medical Journal. 2012; 23: 87–94. doi: 10.30096/CSMJ.201212.0003

19. García A, Cacho P, Lara F. Evaluating relative accommodations in general binocular dysfunctions. Optom Vis Sci. 2002; 79: 779–787. doi: 10.1097/00006324-200212000-00010 12512686

20. Weissberg EM. Diagnostic techniques. In: Weissberg EW, ed. Essential of clinical binocular vision. St.Louis: Butterworth-Heinemann; 2004. pp. 158–164.

21. Gall R, Wick B, Bedell H. Vergence facility: establishing clinical utility. Optom Vis Sci. 1998; 75: 731–742. doi: 10.1097/00006324-199810000-00018 9798213

22. Worrell BE Jr, Hirsch MJ, Morgan MW. An evaluation of prism prescribed by Sheard's criterion. Am J Optom Arch Am Acad Optom. 1971; 48: 373–376. doi: 10.1097/00006324-197105000-00001 4931926

23. Percival A. The prescribing of spectacles, 3rd ed. Bristol: John Wright & Sons; 1928. pp. 102–109. https://archive.org/details/b21287405/page/102

24. Benjamin WJ. Borish’s clinical refraction, 2nd ed. St. Louis: Butterworth-Heinemann; 2006. pp. 968–972.

25. Cooper J, Duckman R. Convergence insufficiency: incidence, diagnosis, and treatment. J Am Optom Assoc. 1978; 49: 673–680. 355298

26. Porcar E, Martinez-Palomera A. Prevalence of general binocular dysfunctions in a population of university students. Optom Vis Sci. 1997; 74: 111–113. doi: 10.1097/00006324-199702000-00023 9097328

27. Wajuihian SO, Hansraj R. A review of non-strabismic accommodative-vergence anomalies in school-age children. Part 1: Vergence anomalies. Afr Vision Eye Health. 2015; 74: 1–10. doi: 10.4102/aveh.v74i1.32

28. Gupta R, Sharma B, Anand R, Bawaria S, Dewada R. Association of asthenopia and convergence insufficiency in children with refractive error—a hospital based study. Int J Med Res Rev. 2013; 1: 222–227. http://medresearch.in/index.php/IJMRR/article/view/51/178

29. Wajuihian SO. Is there an association between convergence insufficiency and refractive errors?. Afr Vision Eye Health. 2017; 76: 1–7. https://doi.org/10.4102/aveh.v76i1.363

30. Davis AL, Harvey EM, Twelker JD, Miller JM, Leonard-Green T, Campus I. Convergence insufficiency, accommodative insufficiency, visual symptoms, and astigmatism in Tohono O'odham students. J Ophthalmol. 2016; 2016: 1–7. doi: 10.1155/2016/6963976 27525112

31. Schor CM. A dynamic model of cross-coupling between accommodation and convergence: simulations of step and frequency responses. Optom Vis Sci. 1992; 69: 258–269. doi: 10.1097/00006324-199204000-00002 1565425

32. Convergence Insufficiency Treatment Trial Study Group. Randomized clinical trial of treatments for symptomatic convergence insufficiency in children. Arch Ophthalmol. 2008; 126: 1336–1349. doi: 10.1001/archopht.126.10.1336 18852411

33. Sheedy JE, Saladin JJ. Association of symptoms with measures of oculomotor deficiencies. Am J Optom Physiol Opt. 1978; 55: 670–676. doi: 10.1097/00006324-197810000-00002 747192

34. O’Leary CI, Evans BJ. Double-masked randomised placebo-controlled trial of the effect of prismatic corrections on rate of reading and the relationship with symptoms. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 2006; 26: 555–565. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-1313.2006.00400.x 17040419

35. Yu DS, Cho HG, Moon BY. Influence of different diagnostic criteria on frequency of convergence insufficiency. J Korean Ophthalmic Opt Soc. 2016; 21: 235–242. doi: 10.14479/jkoos.2016.21.3.235

36. Gallaway M, Scheiman M, Malhotra K. The effectiveness of pencil pushups treatment for convergence insufficiency: a pilot study. Optom Vis Sci. 2002; 79: 265–267. doi: 10.1097/00006324-200204000-00013 11999152

37. Sheedy JE, Saladin JJ. Phoria, vergence, and fixation disparity in oculomotor problems. Am J Optom Physiol Opt. 1977; 54: 474–478. doi: 10.1097/00006324-197707000-00008 931014

38. Horwood AM, Toor S, Riddell PM. Screening for convergence insufficiency using the CISS is not indicated in young adults. Br J Ophthalmol. 2014; 98: 679–683. doi: 10.1136/bjophthalmol-2013-304533 24532798

39. Borsting E, Rouse MW, Deland PN, Hovett S, Kimura D, Park M, et al. Association of symptoms and convergence and accommodative insufficiency in school-age children. Optometry. 2003; 74: 25–34. 12539890


Článek vyšel v časopise

PLOS One


2020 Číslo 1