Effect of Wearing Corrective Glasses for One Month on Binocular Vision in Anisometropic and Isoametropic Patients

Document Type : Original article

Authors

1 Student Research Committee, MSc Student of Optometry, School of Rehabilitation, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

2 Department of Optometry, School of Rehabilitation, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences

3 Medical Student, Students’ Scientific Research Center, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

4 Professor, Department of Basic Sciences, School of Rehabilitation, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

5 OD in Optometry, School of Rehabilitation, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

6 MSc of Optometry, School of Rehabilitation, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

Abstract

Background and Aims: Considering the effects of binocular anomalies in patient's daily activities, including those with isoametropia and anisometropia, and as the first option for correcting refractive errors, the present study was conducted to investigate if wearing glasses for a month could make a difference in binocular anomalies in patients with considerable refractive errors.
Materials and Methods: In the current cross-sectional study, 56 patients aged 8-38 years old (28 patients with anisometropia and 28 patients with isoametropia) who visited our office either for annual check-up or having other eye symptoms were included. Patients included did not have strabismus or microtropia and were examined by an ophthalmologist to check for possible pathologies. Patients’ refraction (objective and subjective) showed an amount of refractive errors that needed glasses or a change in the current eye glasses. Their sensory fusion, stereopsis, Near Point of Accommodation, and accommodative facility were examined exactly after wearing newly prescibed glasses and once more after one month of use. The results were evaluated between groups and then among the groups.
Results:The mean age of the participants was 24.3 (SEM=1.7) for patients with anisometropia and 21 (SEM=1.4) for isoametropic patients. There was no significant statistical difference between anisometropic and isoametropic groups in any of the measured variables both in the first and second examinations (Table 1). Stereopsis and accommodative facility improved significantly in both groups (p<0.05). But there was no significant difference in Near Point of Accommodation (p>0.05).
Conclusion: According to the results of the current study, we observed improvement in stereopsis and accommodation facility in the two groups after using glasses. As a result, after one month of using corrective glasses, in addition to improvement in binocular vision, some symptoms such as blurred vision, headache and ocular fatigue disappeared.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

1.   Benjamin WJ. Borish's clinical refraction. 2nd ed: Butterworth-Heinemann St. Louis; 2006:1479,1483-85.##
2.   Griffin JR, Grisham JD. Binocular anomalies: diagnosis and vision therapy. 4th ed: Butterworth-Heinemann Medical; 2002:4,11. ##
3.   Rosner J, Rosner J. Pediatric optometry: Butterworth-Heinemann Medical; 1990. ##
4.   Scheiman M, Wick B. Clinical management of binocular vision: heterophoric, accommodative, and eye movement disorders. 3rd ed: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2008: 96. ##
5.   Saladin J. Convergence insufficiency, fixation disparity, and control systems analysis. American journal of optometry and physiological optics. 1986;63(8):645. ##
6.   Dwyer P, Wick B. The influence of refractive correction upon disorders of vergence and accommodation. Optometry & Vision Science. 1995;72(4):224-32. ##
7.   Lee JY, Seo JY, Baek SU. The effects of glasses for anisometropia on stereopsis. American journal of ophthalmology. 2013;156(6):1261-6. e1. ##
8.   Atilla H, Erkam N. Comparison of anisometropes with and without amblyopia. Indian journal of ophthalmology. 2011;59(3):215. ##
9.   Brooks SE, Johnson D, Fischer N. Anisometropia and binocularity. Ophthalmology. 1996;103(7):1139-43. ##
10. Dadeya S, Shibal F. The effect of anisometropia on binocular visual function. Indian journal of ophthalmology. 2001;49(4):261. ##
11. Donzis PB, Rappazzo JA, Bürde RM, Gordon M. Effect of binocular variations of Snellen's visual acuity on Titmus stereoacuity. Archives of Ophthalmology. 1983;101(6):930-2. ##
12. Goodwin RT, Romano PE. Stereoacuity degradation by experimental and real monocular and binocular amblyopia. Investigative ophthalmology & visual science. 1985;26(7):917-23. ##
13. LARSON WL, LACHANCE A. Stereoscopic acuity with induced refractive errors. Optometry & Vision Science. 1983;60(6):509-13. ##
14. Levy NS, Glick EB. Stereoscopic perception and Snellen visual acuity. American journal of ophthalmology. 1974;78(4):722. ##
15. Lovasik JV, Szymkiw M. Effects of aniseikonia, anisometropia, accommodation, retinal illuminance, and pupil size on stereopsis. Investigative ophthalmology & visual science. 1985;26(5):741-50. ##
16. Peters HB. The Influence Of Anisometropia On Stereosensitivity. Optometry & Vision Science. 1969;46(2):120-3. ##
17. Simpson T. The suppression effect of simulated anisometropia. Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics. 1991;11(4):350-8. ##
18. Westheimer G, McKee SP. Stereoscopic acuity with defocused and spatially filtered retinal images. JOSA. 1980;70(7):772-8. ##
19. Wood I. Stereopsis With Spatially‐Degraded Images. Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics. 1983;3(3):337-40. ##
The Scientific Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine
Volume 9, Issue 1
April 2020
Pages 18-24

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 28 December 2018
  • Revise Date: 21 February 2019
  • Accept Date: 13 May 2019
  • First Publish Date: 20 March 2020

Share

How to cite

Statistics