Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research, ISSN - 0973 - 709X

Users Online : 115380

AbstractMaterial and MethodsResultsDiscussionConclusionAcknowledgementReferencesDOI and Others
Article in PDF How to Cite Citation Manager Readers' Comments (0) Audio Visual Article Statistics Link to PUBMED Print this Article Send to a Friend
Advertisers Access Statistics Resources

Dr Mohan Z Mani

"Thank you very much for having published my article in record time.I would like to compliment you and your entire staff for your promptness, courtesy, and willingness to be customer friendly, which is quite unusual.I was given your reference by a colleague in pathology,and was able to directly phone your editorial office for clarifications.I would particularly like to thank the publication managers and the Assistant Editor who were following up my article. I would also like to thank you for adjusting the money I paid initially into payment for my modified article,and refunding the balance.
I wish all success to your journal and look forward to sending you any suitable similar article in future"



Dr Mohan Z Mani,
Professor & Head,
Department of Dermatolgy,
Believers Church Medical College,
Thiruvalla, Kerala
On Sep 2018




Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar

"Over the last few years, we have published our research regularly in Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research. Having published in more than 20 high impact journals over the last five years including several high impact ones and reviewing articles for even more journals across my fields of interest, we value our published work in JCDR for their high standards in publishing scientific articles. The ease of submission, the rapid reviews in under a month, the high quality of their reviewers and keen attention to the final process of proofs and publication, ensure that there are no mistakes in the final article. We have been asked clarifications on several occasions and have been happy to provide them and it exemplifies the commitment to quality of the team at JCDR."



Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar
Head, Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad
Chairman, Research Group, Charutar Arogya Mandal, Karamsad
National Joint Coordinator - Advanced IAP NNF NRP Program
Ex-Member, Governing Body, National Neonatology Forum, New Delhi
Ex-President - National Neonatology Forum Gujarat State Chapter
Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad, Anand, Gujarat.
On Sep 2018




Dr. Kalyani R

"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research is at present a well-known Indian originated scientific journal which started with a humble beginning. I have been associated with this journal since many years. I appreciate the Editor, Dr. Hemant Jain, for his constant effort in bringing up this journal to the present status right from the scratch. The journal is multidisciplinary. It encourages in publishing the scientific articles from postgraduates and also the beginners who start their career. At the same time the journal also caters for the high quality articles from specialty and super-specialty researchers. Hence it provides a platform for the scientist and researchers to publish. The other aspect of it is, the readers get the information regarding the most recent developments in science which can be used for teaching, research, treating patients and to some extent take preventive measures against certain diseases. The journal is contributing immensely to the society at national and international level."



Dr Kalyani R
Professor and Head
Department of Pathology
Sri Devaraj Urs Medical College
Sri Devaraj Urs Academy of Higher Education and Research , Kolar, Karnataka
On Sep 2018




Dr. Saumya Navit

"As a peer-reviewed journal, the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research provides an opportunity to researchers, scientists and budding professionals to explore the developments in the field of medicine and dentistry and their varied specialities, thus extending our view on biological diversities of living species in relation to medicine.
‘Knowledge is treasure of a wise man.’ The free access of this journal provides an immense scope of learning for the both the old and the young in field of medicine and dentistry as well. The multidisciplinary nature of the journal makes it a better platform to absorb all that is being researched and developed. The publication process is systematic and professional. Online submission, publication and peer reviewing makes it a user-friendly journal.
As an experienced dentist and an academician, I proudly recommend this journal to the dental fraternity as a good quality open access platform for rapid communication of their cutting-edge research progress and discovery.
I wish JCDR a great success and I hope that journal will soar higher with the passing time."



Dr Saumya Navit
Professor and Head
Department of Pediatric Dentistry
Saraswati Dental College
Lucknow
On Sep 2018




Dr. Arunava Biswas

"My sincere attachment with JCDR as an author as well as reviewer is a learning experience . Their systematic approach in publication of article in various categories is really praiseworthy.
Their prompt and timely response to review's query and the manner in which they have set the reviewing process helps in extracting the best possible scientific writings for publication.
It's a honour and pride to be a part of the JCDR team. My very best wishes to JCDR and hope it will sparkle up above the sky as a high indexed journal in near future."



Dr. Arunava Biswas
MD, DM (Clinical Pharmacology)
Assistant Professor
Department of Pharmacology
Calcutta National Medical College & Hospital , Kolkata




Dr. C.S. Ramesh Babu
" Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a multi-specialty medical and dental journal publishing high quality research articles in almost all branches of medicine. The quality of printing of figures and tables is excellent and comparable to any International journal. An added advantage is nominal publication charges and monthly issue of the journal and more chances of an article being accepted for publication. Moreover being a multi-specialty journal an article concerning a particular specialty has a wider reach of readers of other related specialties also. As an author and reviewer for several years I find this Journal most suitable and highly recommend this Journal."
Best regards,
C.S. Ramesh Babu,
Associate Professor of Anatomy,
Muzaffarnagar Medical College,
Muzaffarnagar.
On Aug 2018




Dr. Arundhathi. S
"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a reputed peer reviewed journal and is constantly involved in publishing high quality research articles related to medicine. Its been a great pleasure to be associated with this esteemed journal as a reviewer and as an author for a couple of years. The editorial board consists of many dedicated and reputed experts as its members and they are doing an appreciable work in guiding budding researchers. JCDR is doing a commendable job in scientific research by promoting excellent quality research & review articles and case reports & series. The reviewers provide appropriate suggestions that improve the quality of articles. I strongly recommend my fraternity to encourage JCDR by contributing their valuable research work in this widely accepted, user friendly journal. I hope my collaboration with JCDR will continue for a long time".



Dr. Arundhathi. S
MBBS, MD (Pathology),
Sanjay Gandhi institute of trauma and orthopedics,
Bengaluru.
On Aug 2018




Dr. Mamta Gupta,
"It gives me great pleasure to be associated with JCDR, since last 2-3 years. Since then I have authored, co-authored and reviewed about 25 articles in JCDR. I thank JCDR for giving me an opportunity to improve my own skills as an author and a reviewer.
It 's a multispecialty journal, publishing high quality articles. It gives a platform to the authors to publish their research work which can be available for everyone across the globe to read. The best thing about JCDR is that the full articles of all medical specialties are available as pdf/html for reading free of cost or without institutional subscription, which is not there for other journals. For those who have problem in writing manuscript or do statistical work, JCDR comes for their rescue.
The journal has a monthly publication and the articles are published quite fast. In time compared to other journals. The on-line first publication is also a great advantage and facility to review one's own articles before going to print. The response to any query and permission if required, is quite fast; this is quite commendable. I have a very good experience about seeking quick permission for quoting a photograph (Fig.) from a JCDR article for my chapter authored in an E book. I never thought it would be so easy. No hassles.
Reviewing articles is no less a pain staking process and requires in depth perception, knowledge about the topic for review. It requires time and concentration, yet I enjoy doing it. The JCDR website especially for the reviewers is quite user friendly. My suggestions for improving the journal is, more strict review process, so that only high quality articles are published. I find a a good number of articles in Obst. Gynae, hence, a new journal for this specialty titled JCDR-OG can be started. May be a bimonthly or quarterly publication to begin with. Only selected articles should find a place in it.
An yearly reward for the best article authored can also incentivize the authors. Though the process of finding the best article will be not be very easy. I do not know how reviewing process can be improved. If an article is being reviewed by two reviewers, then opinion of one can be communicated to the other or the final opinion of the editor can be communicated to the reviewer if requested for. This will help one’s reviewing skills.
My best wishes to Dr. Hemant Jain and all the editorial staff of JCDR for their untiring efforts to bring out this journal. I strongly recommend medical fraternity to publish their valuable research work in this esteemed journal, JCDR".



Dr. Mamta Gupta
Consultant
(Ex HOD Obs &Gynae, Hindu Rao Hospital and associated NDMC Medical College, Delhi)
Aug 2018




Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey

"I wish to thank Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), for asking me to write up few words.
Writing is the representation of language in a textual medium i e; into the words and sentences on paper. Quality medical manuscript writing in particular, demands not only a high-quality research, but also requires accurate and concise communication of findings and conclusions, with adherence to particular journal guidelines. In medical field whether working in teaching, private, or in corporate institution, everyone wants to excel in his / her own field and get recognised by making manuscripts publication.


Authors are the souls of any journal, and deserve much respect. To publish a journal manuscripts are needed from authors. Authors have a great responsibility for producing facts of their work in terms of number and results truthfully and an individual honesty is expected from authors in this regards. Both ways its true "No authors-No manuscripts-No journals" and "No journals–No manuscripts–No authors". Reviewing a manuscript is also a very responsible and important task of any peer-reviewed journal and to be taken seriously. It needs knowledge on the subject, sincerity, honesty and determination. Although the process of reviewing a manuscript is a time consuming task butit is expected to give one's best remarks within the time frame of the journal.
Salient features of the JCDR: It is a biomedical, multidisciplinary (including all medical and dental specialities), e-journal, with wide scope and extensive author support. At the same time, a free text of manuscript is available in HTML and PDF format. There is fast growing authorship and readership with JCDR as this can be judged by the number of articles published in it i e; in Feb 2007 of its first issue, it contained 5 articles only, and now in its recent volume published in April 2011, it contained 67 manuscripts. This e-journal is fulfilling the commitments and objectives sincerely, (as stated by Editor-in-chief in his preface to first edition) i e; to encourage physicians through the internet, especially from the developing countries who witness a spectrum of disease and acquire a wealth of knowledge to publish their experiences to benefit the medical community in patients care. I also feel that many of us have work of substance, newer ideas, adequate clinical materials but poor in medical writing and hesitation to submit the work and need help. JCDR provides authors help in this regards.
Timely publication of journal: Publication of manuscripts and bringing out the issue in time is one of the positive aspects of JCDR and is possible with strong support team in terms of peer reviewers, proof reading, language check, computer operators, etc. This is one of the great reasons for authors to submit their work with JCDR. Another best part of JCDR is "Online first Publications" facilities available for the authors. This facility not only provides the prompt publications of the manuscripts but at the same time also early availability of the manuscripts for the readers.
Indexation and online availability: Indexation transforms the journal in some sense from its local ownership to the worldwide professional community and to the public.JCDR is indexed with Embase & EMbiology, Google Scholar, Index Copernicus, Chemical Abstracts Service, Journal seek Database, Indian Science Abstracts, to name few of them. Manuscriptspublished in JCDR are available on major search engines ie; google, yahoo, msn.
In the era of fast growing newer technologies, and in computer and internet friendly environment the manuscripts preparation, submission, review, revision, etc and all can be done and checked with a click from all corer of the world, at any time. Of course there is always a scope for improvement in every field and none is perfect. To progress, one needs to identify the areas of one's weakness and to strengthen them.
It is well said that "happy beginning is half done" and it fits perfectly with JCDR. It has grown considerably and I feel it has already grown up from its infancy to adolescence, achieving the status of standard online e-journal form Indian continent since its inception in Feb 2007. This had been made possible due to the efforts and the hard work put in it. The way the JCDR is improving with every new volume, with good quality original manuscripts, makes it a quality journal for readers. I must thank and congratulate Dr Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief JCDR and his team for their sincere efforts, dedication, and determination for making JCDR a fast growing journal.
Every one of us: authors, reviewers, editors, and publisher are responsible for enhancing the stature of the journal. I wish for a great success for JCDR."



Thanking you
With sincere regards
Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey, M.S., M. Ch., FAIS
Associate Professor,
Department of Paediatric Surgery, Gandhi Medical College & Associated
Kamla Nehru & Hamidia Hospitals Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh 462 001 (India)
E-mail: drrajendrak1@rediffmail.com
On May 11,2011




Dr. Shankar P.R.

"On looking back through my Gmail archives after being requested by the journal to write a short editorial about my experiences of publishing with the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), I came across an e-mail from Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor, in March 2007, which introduced the new electronic journal. The main features of the journal which were outlined in the e-mail were extensive author support, cash rewards, the peer review process, and other salient features of the journal.
Over a span of over four years, we (I and my colleagues) have published around 25 articles in the journal. In this editorial, I plan to briefly discuss my experiences of publishing with JCDR and the strengths of the journal and to finally address the areas for improvement.
My experiences of publishing with JCDR: Overall, my experiences of publishing withJCDR have been positive. The best point about the journal is that it responds to queries from the author. This may seem to be simple and not too much to ask for, but unfortunately, many journals in the subcontinent and from many developing countries do not respond or they respond with a long delay to the queries from the authors 1. The reasons could be many, including lack of optimal secretarial and other support. Another problem with many journals is the slowness of the review process. Editorial processing and peer review can take anywhere between a year to two years with some journals. Also, some journals do not keep the contributors informed about the progress of the review process. Due to the long review process, the articles can lose their relevance and topicality. A major benefit with JCDR is the timeliness and promptness of its response. In Dr Jain's e-mail which was sent to me in 2007, before the introduction of the Pre-publishing system, he had stated that he had received my submission and that he would get back to me within seven days and he did!
Most of the manuscripts are published within 3 to 4 months of their submission if they are found to be suitable after the review process. JCDR is published bimonthly and the accepted articles were usually published in the next issue. Recently, due to the increased volume of the submissions, the review process has become slower and it ?? Section can take from 4 to 6 months for the articles to be reviewed. The journal has an extensive author support system and it has recently introduced a paid expedited review process. The journal also mentions the average time for processing the manuscript under different submission systems - regular submission and expedited review.
Strengths of the journal: The journal has an online first facility in which the accepted manuscripts may be published on the website before being included in a regular issue of the journal. This cuts down the time between their acceptance and the publication. The journal is indexed in many databases, though not in PubMed. The editorial board should now take steps to index the journal in PubMed. The journal has a system of notifying readers through e-mail when a new issue is released. Also, the articles are available in both the HTML and the PDF formats. I especially like the new and colorful page format of the journal. Also, the access statistics of the articles are available. The prepublication and the manuscript tracking system are also helpful for the authors.
Areas for improvement: In certain cases, I felt that the peer review process of the manuscripts was not up to international standards and that it should be strengthened. Also, the number of manuscripts in an issue is high and it may be difficult for readers to go through all of them. The journal can consider tightening of the peer review process and increasing the quality standards for the acceptance of the manuscripts. I faced occasional problems with the online manuscript submission (Pre-publishing) system, which have to be addressed.
Overall, the publishing process with JCDR has been smooth, quick and relatively hassle free and I can recommend other authors to consider the journal as an outlet for their work."



Dr. P. Ravi Shankar
KIST Medical College, P.O. Box 14142, Kathmandu, Nepal.
E-mail: ravi.dr.shankar@gmail.com
On April 2011
Anuradha

Dear team JCDR, I would like to thank you for the very professional and polite service provided by everyone at JCDR. While i have been in the field of writing and editing for sometime, this has been my first attempt in publishing a scientific paper.Thank you for hand-holding me through the process.


Dr. Anuradha
E-mail: anuradha2nittur@gmail.com
On Jan 2020

Important Notice

Original article / research
Year : 2022 | Month : October | Volume : 16 | Issue : 10 | Page : NC09 - NC13 Full Version

Clinical Effectiveness of Facility and Accuracy of Accommodation in Diagnosis of Non Strabismic Binocular Vision Anomalies in Young Adults: A Prospective Cross-sectional Observational Study


Published: October 1, 2022 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2022/57570.17112
Mousumi Saikia, Kamal Pant, Joydeep Dutta

1. Optometrist, Department of Optometry and Vision Science, Amity Medical School, Gurugram, Haryana, India. 2. Head, Department of Optometry, Uttar Pradesh University of Medical Sciences, Saifai, Uttar Pradesh , India. 3. Professor, Department of Chemistry, Amity School of Applied Sciences, Gurugram, Haryana, India.

Correspondence Address :
Joydeep Dutta,
Professor, Department of Chemistry, Amity School of Applied Sciences, Amity University, Gurugram, Haryana, India.
E-mail: duttajoyster@gmail.com

Abstract

Introduction: Orthoptic evaluation is highly recommended in children and young adults to diagnose binocular dysfunctions. Binocular vision dysfunctions may hamper academic performance in children. Accommodative facility and accommodative accuracy are two orthoptic tests to evaluate accommodative flexibility and accommodative status of eye.

Aim: To investigate the effectiveness of facility and accuracy of accommodation in diagnosis of Non Strabismic Binocular Vision Anomalies (NSBVA) in young adults.

Materials and Methods: This prospective, cross-sectional observational study was conducted at Optsight Eye Care in association with Amity Medical School, Gurugram, Haryana, India, from August 2020 to August 2021. A total of 175 subjects (both symptomatic and asymptomatic) with normal anterior and posterior segment findings, and aged between 18-25 years were evaluated for accommodative facility test with the help of accommodative lens flipper ±2D and for accommodative status test with the help of monocular estimation method (dynamic retinoscopy). Both the tests were done over their best corrected visual acuity after refractive error correction and the Pearson correlation test was applied to find out the correlation. Further, complete orthoptic examination was performed for all the subjects to correlate the abnormal findings from the two tests and conventional orthoptic tests. Independent sample t-test was applied to compare the accommodative facility between refractive groups.

Results: Out of 175 subjects, 84 (48%) of the subjects were found to have NSBVA which included 26 (14.86%) convergence insufficiency, 30 (17.14%) with accommodative insufficiency, 25 (14.29%) with convergence insufficiency secondary to accommodative insufficiency and 3 (1.71%) with accommodative infacility. A positive correlation between binocular accommodative facility and status of accommodation was found with a p-value <0.001 (r=0.51).

Conclusion: Status of accommodation and facility test can help to differentiate the accommodative and vergence problems making examination less time consuming. Both of these procedures should be a part of general routine eye examination protocol in the young adult group, so that detection of these anomalies become less time consuming and patient gets benefitted from early intervention.

Keywords

Binocular dysfunction, Convergence insuficiency, Orthoptic evaluation

Prevalence of Nonstrabismic Binocular Vision Anomalies (NSBVAs) are highly significant among young adults. The diagnosis of such anomalies is based on the evaluation of both accommodative and vergence parameters. A range of tests under near visual skills and visual perceptual skills are measured in a sequence at orthoptic clinics. But in general eye examination, ophthalmologists and optometrists do not perform the accommodative and vergence tests. Because of the latent nature of these anomalies, it’s left undiagnosed and untreated. A quick referral to the orthoptic clinic will be beneficial to the patients, if some minimum orthoptic tests (accommodative and vergence parameters) can be added in general eye examination protocol. The clinical standard of accommodative facility, an investigation of near visual skills, was explained by Zellers JA et al., (1). It has been getting much attention in literatures recently. Clinical accommodative facility tests are commonly used as a count of visual fatigue and gives useful information in relation to accommodative and binocular dysfunctions (2),(3),(4). This can be obtained while maintaining the constant angle of convergence (binocularly) and abolishing the convergence (monocularly).

The accuracy of accommodative response (accommodative status) is the actual amount of accommodation by the crystalline lens for a given stimulus. It is usually the least accommodation required to obtain a clear image. It basically represents the relationship between the steady state accommodation and stimulus vergence. Individual’s accommodative response to the near working distance stimulus can be more than, equal to, or less than the accommodative demand (5). The lag of accommodation is the condition when a person’s eye under accommodates at a stimulus than required accommodation where eye appears to focus farther than the stimulus. On the other hand, lead of accommodation is found with overaccommodation of eye where it appears to focus nearer than the stimulus. Monocular estimation method is considered a test of accommodative status function; binocular vision is also assessed. In normal condition, with a fixed near point stimulus in relation to accommodative system, a small lag of accommodation (+0.25 to +0.5. Dsph) is present. Predictions can be made that a greater variation in accommodative esponse from monocular to binocular conditions could be associated with an abnormal binocular accommodative response and thus perhaps greater possibility of symptoms.

Inclusion of these two orthoptic investigations in routine eye examination may provide important information for further management in lesser time. The aim of the study was to find out the effectiveness of the two orthoptic tests i.e., accommodative facility and accommodative accuracy (status) in the diagnosis of NSBVAs in young adults.

Material and Methods

This prospective, cross-sectional observational study was conducted at Optsight Eye Care associated with Amity Medical School, Amity University, Haryana, India, from August 2020 to August 2021. This study was approved by Institutional Ethical Board of Amity University, Haryana (AUH/EC/E/2017/51), and adhered to the tenets of Declaration of Helsinki.

Both symptomatic and asymptomatic subjects with best corrected visual acuity 6/6, N6 (both anterior segment and posterior segment within normal limit) were selected for the study from the general Outpatient Department.

Sample size calculation: According to a previous study the overall prevalence of accommodative and/or binocular dysfunctions was 13.15 per cent in university age group (6).

Formula used:

Sample size= Z1-a/22p(1-p)/d2

Z1-a/2 =Standard normal variate. The score depends on Confidence Interval (CI), for 95% CI it is 1.96
p=Expected population proportion based on previous studies. Here it was 0.13
d=Margin of error (generally 5%=0.05)

The calculated sample size was 174. Authors selected total 175 subjects for the study.

Inclusion criteria: Healthy eyes (anterior and posterior segment normal), age group between 18-25 years, best corrected visual acuity 6/6 (20/20), insignificant refractive error (within ±0.75D spherical only), with or without asthenopic symptoms, no systemic illness were included in the study.

Exclusion criteria: Subjects with any abnormality in the anterior and posterior segment evaluation, age <18 and >25 years, amblyopia, strabismus, refractive error >± 0.75 D and any amount of astigmatism were excluded from the study.

As a part of the study protocol, subjects were explained the procedures and written informed consent along with personal details were obtained.

Study Procedure

This cross-sectional observational prospective study was conducted with 175 subjects (90 female and 85 male); age between 18-25 years. Each subject was asked about his or her chief visual complaints, medical and ocular history, medications, and hypersensitivities. Visual acuity both distance and near along with objective and subjective refraction for best corrected visual acuity was performed. General slit lamp examination was done for anterior and posterior segment assessment.

Accommodative Facility (AF) with flipper of +2/ -2D was measured both monocularly and binocularly in all subjects at 40 cm testing distance. In continuation, accommodative status was measured objectively with Monocular Estimation Method (MEM) technique and noted against AF.

In accommodative facility testing, the accommodation level was changed with the use of a lens flipper (usually ±2.00 D). During this procedure, when sharp vision was attained at one level, the lens was flipped to produce accommodation to the other level. The number of cycles between both levels in a given time period, usually one minute, were recorded.

Accommodative status (accuracy to accommodative response) was measured in positive or negative lenses with the help of dynamic retinoscopy (MEM). It represented the individual’s lag (value in plus) or lead (value in minus) of accommodation to the near working distance stimulus.

Subjects with abnormal facility and status of accommodation along with normal subjects were further evaluated with detailed orthoptic work up to confirm the diagnosis. To detect and properly diagnose nonstrabismic accommodative and vergence anomalies, it is important to have a comprehensive package of accommodation and vergence tests as well as a systematic method for the analysis of accommodation and vergence findings. Preliminary orthoptic tests included cover test along with phoria measurement at near and at distance, near point of convergence, ocular motility, fusion (Worth 4-dot test) and stereopsis (titmus fly). Next Accommodative Convergence/Accommodation (AC/A) ratio was obtained with the gradient method, lateral and vertical fusional vergence at near and at distance (step vergence testing), vergence facility testing (12 prism diopters base-out and 3 prism diopters base-in), negative and positive relative accommodation, monocular and Binocular Accommodative Facility (BAF) (flippers with ±2.00-diopter lenses), MEM and amplitude of accommodation using the push-up with Royal Air Force (RAF) ruler were measured.

The diagnosis of NSBVAs was made based on the protocol suggested by Scheiman M and Wick B (7).

Statistical Analysis

The data were entered into the excel sheet and analysed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences version 20.0 (SPSS Inc, Chicago, IL, USA). Continuous variables were expressed as mean±Standard Deviation (SD) and categorical variables were expressed as absolute numbers and percentages (n, %) with descriptive statistics. Pearson correlation test was applied to find out the correlation between BAF and accommodative status (MEM value). The comparison of AF in refractive error groups were tested with a parametric test i.e. independent samples t-test. Levene’s test for equality of variances indicates about the equal or unequal variances across the two groups (emmetropia-myopia and emmetropiahypermetropia) to further choice between “equal variances assumed data” or “equal variances not assumed data”. The p-value <0.01 was considered as significant.

Results

On accommodative facility testing, out of 175 subjects (mean age 20.31±1.92 years); 91 were found with normal value both monocularly and binocularly. Overall, 41 (23.33%) and 43 (24.57%) had problem with monocular and BAF, respectively. A total of 37 (21.1%) lead and 44 (25.1%) lag of accommodation were noticed. All 84 (48%) subjects with abnormal facility and abnormal accuracy of accommodation (n=81) has been shown in the (Table/Fig 1). Further all the subjects evaluated with detail orthoptic tests and surprisingly all 84 (48%) among 175 subjects were found with NSBVA (Table/Fig 2). It included 26 (14.84%) convergence insufficiency, 30 (17.14%) with accommodative insufficiency, and 25 (14.28%) with convergence insufficiency secondary to accommodative sufficiency, 3 (1.71%) with accommodative infacility.

It was observed that 30 (69.77%) of the subjects who had lead of accommodation also had problem in BAF and 31 (75.6%) of subjects with lag of accommodation had issue with Monocular Accommodative Facility (MAF) (Table/Fig 1). The graphical representation shows this finding together for both lead and lag of accommodation (Table/Fig 3).

Pearson correlation test found out a moderate positive correlation between BAF and accuracy of accommodation (Table/Fig 4) with a p-value <0.001 (r=0.5135). Out of 175 subjects 99 were emmetropic, 56 were myopic and 20 were hypermetropic. It showed significant BAF mean difference in emmetropic subjects (mean=9.46) compared to myopic subjects (mean=5.33), where hypermetropia showed a mean of 7.7 (Table/Fig 5). The study found a significant BAF mean difference in emmetropic subjects (mean=9.5) compaired to myopic subjects (mean=5.33) with equal variances assumed (Table/Fig 6). There was no statistically significant facility difference between emmetropia and hypermetropia (Table/Fig 7).

Discussion

Looking at the huge population of India and with a prevalence of binocular vision anomalies of about 30-34%, intervention in this area is largely anticipated [8-10]. The NSBVAs are considered as vision anomalies which affect clarity, binocularity, impair the comfort and effectiveness of visual performance. Clinical diagnostic signs associated with each type of anomalies (accommodative anomalies i.e. accommodative insufficiency, accommodative infacility, accommodative fatigue etc and vergence anomalies i.e. convergence insufficiency, divergence insufficiency, convergence excess, divergence excess etc) are different (11).

Few studies have reported that children who have binocular dysfunctions encounter anxiety, emotional and social problems (12),(13),(14),(15). Children with uncorrected NSBVAs may be misdiagnosed as being dyslexic (16),(17),(18). Early diagnosis always plays an important role on prognosis. It is a time taking procedure to differentiate the signs of accommodative anomalies and vergence anomalies separately. In recent years, many researchers have reported about the clinical significance of testing the accuracy of accommodative response (accommodative status) and accommodative facility as well as amplitude in the young adult group population (19),(20). An important aspect is that a subject may experience asthenopic symptoms and have an accommodative anomaly even when the accommodative amplitude is normal (21).

Accommodative and vergence functions influence the test results of binocular examination. Monocular testing provides a direct evaluation of the dynamics of accommodative responses and binocular testing of accommodative facility yields similar information but also reviews the interactive nature of the relation between accommodation and vergence, referred to as interactive facility (22),(23). Garcia A et al., observed less accommodative facility in prediagnosed 48 NSBVA patients, aged 10-30 years (24). This study also reported an interesting finding that MAF provided more information about the anomalies of a patient. It showed the importance of the accommodative facility test in diagnosis of NSBVA.

In this study, it has been observed that reduced MAF correlated with accommodative related subject issues and reduced BAF mainly correlated with subject’s vergence issues. This study found a positive relation between facility and status of accommodation. As a whole, the data support a relation between AF, status of accommodation and a dysfunction and there is a positive relation between lead of accommodation and BAF as well as lag of accommodation and MAF. Total 69.76% of subjects who had lead of accommodation also had problem in BAF and 75.6% of subjects with lag of accommodation had issue with MAF. These results suggest that performing accommodative facility and accuracy may play a vital role in the diagnosis of accommodative and binocular dysfunctions. The current study showed 48% of the subjects were found with NSBVA, where, 14.84% convergence insufficiency, 17.14% with accommodative insufficiency and 14.28% with convergence insufficiency secondary to accommodative insufficiency, 1.71% with accommodative infacility among the young adult (18-25 years) age group. Whereas, in another study Darko-Takyi C et al., found 21.9% and 12.4% nonstrabismic accommodative and vergence dysfunctions respectively in ages ranging from 19-27 years (25). In specific type of disorders, they found accommodative fatigue 8.6%, AF 6.7%, accommodative insufficiency 4.7%, convergence insufficiency 1.9%, convergence excess 1%, and divergence insufficiency 2.9% which was not similar to the current findings. Another study by Atiya A et al., confirmed 55% of 75 ophthalmology trainee had a diagnosis of a nonstrabismic binocular vision dysfunction (26). The mean age of the subjects included in that study was 29±3 years and 20% of them had convergence insufficiency, 19% had accommodative infacility, 12% had Intermittent Divergent Squint (IDS), while 4% had convergence excess. However, the age range of this was not similar to current age group study.

As this study was done with limited sample, hospital based setup and at a specific age group, screening of nonstrabismic anomalies on the judgement of these two tests was not commendable. Authors would prefer to suggest the two tests (accommodative facility and accommodative status/accuracy) as additional tests to include into routine eye examination protocol. Though, the mentioned tests did not measure the vergence component directly, but binocular accommodative tests also help in indirect assessment of vergence into some extent. Early provisional diagnosis may be possible at the preliminary level and patient can be referred to orthoptic clinic for all direct tests to get the final diagnosis.

Refractive error is one of the causative factors for variation of accommodative measurements. Another important current concern is myopia progression, where retinal defocus is a significant factor in myopia progression in young adults. O’Leary DJ and Allen PM, concluded that both these factors i.e. AF and the lag of accommodation affect the retinal defocus that distinguishes between progressive and stable myopia (27). The association between myopia and near work is long established, but the search for accommodative problems related with myopia has resulted in some inconsistencies. In myopia, AF (dynamics of accommodation) is less for distance, whereas the accommodative dynamics for near remain unchanged (28),(29). In the same study, it observed no significant influence of refractive error on near MAF measurement (29). The present study also could not give any specific result in near monocular but the BAF of myopic subjects compared to emmetropia was found significant (p<0.01). No significant difference was seen in AF between hypermetropia and emmetropia (p=0.11); both monocularly and binocularly. This may be because numbers of myopic subjects were more than hypermetropic subjects. Study with a larger and equalled sample size will be able to help in finding the difference of monocular and binocular accommodative problems in greater detail according to type of ametropia.

Limitation(s)

The evaluation was not done at community level. Further studies with a larger sample size and a community setup can guide the examiners to make a decision in screening program of NSBVAs.

Conclusion

Accommodative facility testing and status of accommodation always plays a vital role in diagnosing NSBVA as well as prediction of myopic changes in long duration studies. However, this study has also shown that status of accommodation and facility testing can help to differentiate the accommodative and vergence problems making examination less time consuming. Hence, it is suggested to include these two procedures in regular routine general eye examination, particularly in young adult age group. This will improve the referral system as well as help binocular dysfunction patient get the best management at the earliest.

Acknowledgement

The authors acknowledge the support provided by Dr. Madhujya Gogoi (Ophthalmologist), Soujanya Mondal (Optometrist), editorial and production team of the JCDR journal for their support. Authors were also thankful to the subjects for their participation.

References

1.
Zellers JA, Alpert TL, Rouse MW. A review of the literature and a normative study of accommodative facility. J Am Optom Assoc. 1984;55(1):31-37. PMID: 6699343.
2.
Thiagarajan P, Ciuffreda KJ. Visual fatigue and accommodative dynamics in asymptomatic individuals. Optom Vis Sci. 2013;90(1):57-65. Doi: 10.1097/ OPX.0b013e31827a233e. PMID: 23232802. [crossref] [PubMed]
3.
Russell GE, Wick B. A prospective study of treatment of accommodative insufficiency. Optom Vis Sci. 1993;70(2):131-35. Doi: 10.1097/00006324- 199302000-00009. PMID: 8446377. [crossref] [PubMed]
4.
Daum KM. Accommodative dysfunction. Documenta ophthalmologica. Advances in ophthalmology. 1983; 55(3):177-98. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00140808. PMID: 6884172. [crossref] [PubMed]
5.
Tosha C, Borsting E, Ridder WH 3rd, Chase C. Accommodation response and visual discomfort. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 2009;29(6):625-33. doi: 10.1111/ j.1475-1313.2009.00687.x. PMID: 19821926. [crossref] [PubMed]
6.
García-Muñoz Á, Carbonell-Bonete S, Cantó-Cerdán M, Cacho-Martínez P. Accommodative and binocular dysfunctions: prevalence in a randomised sample of university students. Clinical & experimental optometry.2016; 99(4):313-21. https://doi.org/10.1111/cxo.12376 PMID: 27027297 [crossref] [PubMed]
7.
Scheiman M, Wick B. Clinical management of binocular Vision: Heterophoric, Accommodative and Eye Movement Disorders. 4th edn. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2014. pp. 2-48.
8.
Hussaindeen JR, Rakshit A, Singh NK, George R, Swaminathan M, Kapur S. Prevalence of non-strabismic anomalies of binocular vision in Tamil Nadu: report 2 of BAND study. Clinical Experimental Optometry. 2017;100(6):642-48. Doi: 10.1111/cxo.12496. Epub 2016 Nov 18. PMID: 27859646. [crossref] [PubMed]
9.
Tiwari RP, Barot RK, Sawant V, Wagh U, Maknikar B, Kanetkar M, et al. Clinical Profile of Non Strabismic Binocular Vision Anomalies in MBBS and Nursing Students in a Teaching Hospital: A Cross-sectional Study. Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research. 2022;16(6):NC19-NC23. Doi: https://doi.org/10.7860/ JCDR/2022/55946.16478.
10.
Dandapani SA, Padmanabhan P, Hussaindeen JR. Spectrum of Binocular Vision Anomalies in Keratoconus Subjects. Optometry And Vision Science. 2020;97(6):424-28. https://doi.org/10.1097/OPX.0000000000001517 [crossref] [PubMed]
11.
Takyi DC, Khan EN, Nirghin U. A review of the classification of Non Strabismic Binocular Vision Anomalies. Optometry Reports 2016. 5:5626. ISBN: 2039- 4721. Doi: 10.4081/optometry. 2016.5626 [crossref]
12.
Zaba Jn. Social, emotional and educational consequences of undetected children’s vision problems. J Behav Optom. 2001;12(3):66-70.
13.
Bachara G, Zaba J. Psychological effects of visual training. September 1976 Academic Therapy 12(1):99-104 Doi:10.1177/105345127601200108. [crossref]
14.
Johnson R, Nottingham M, Stratton R, Zaba J. The vision screening of academically and behaviourally at risk pupils. J Behav Optom. 1996;7(2):39-42.
15.
Pavlou M, Acheson J, Nicolaou D, Fraser CL, Bronstein AM, Davies RA, et al. Effect of Developmental Binocular Vision Abnormalities on Visual Vertigo Symptoms and Treatment Outcome. Journal of neurologic physical therapy: JNPT. 2015;39(4):215-24. [crossref] [PubMed]
16.
Simons HD, Grisham JD. Binocular anomalies and reading problems. J Am Optom Assoc. 1987;58(7):578-87. PMID: 3312379.
17.
Palomo-Alvarez C, Puell MC. Accommodative function in school children with reading difficulties. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2008;246(12):1769-74. Doi: 10.1007/s00417-008-0921-5. Epub 2008 Aug 28. PMID: 18751994. [crossref] [PubMed]
18.
Palomo-Alvarez C, Puell MC. Binocular function in school children with reading difficulties. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2010;248(6):885-92. Doi: 10.1007/s00417-009-1251-y. Epub 2009 Dec 4. PMID: 19960202. [crossref] [PubMed]
19.
Scheiman M, Herzberg H, Frantz K, Margolies M. Normative study of accommodative facility in elementary schoolchildren. Am J Optom Physiol Opt. 1988;65(2):127-34. Doi: 10.1097/00006324-198802000-00009. PMID: 3364515. [crossref] [PubMed]
20.
Levine S, Ciuffreda KJ, Selenow A, Flax N. Clinical assessment of accommodative facility in symptomatic and asymptomatic individuals. J Am Optom Assoc. 1985;56(4):286-90. PMID: 3989210.
21.
Hennessey D, Iosue RA, Rouse MW. Relation of symptoms to accommodative infacility of school-aged children. Am J Optom Physiol Opt. 1984;61(3):177-83. Doi: 10.1097/00006324-198403000-00005. PMID: 6720863. [crossref] [PubMed]
22.
Liu JS, Lee M, Jang J, Ciuffreda KJ, Wong JH, Grisham D, et al. Objective assessment of accommodation orthoptics. I. Dynamic insufficiency. Am J Optom Physiol Opt. 1979;56(5):285-94. Doi: 10.1097/00006324-197905000-00002. PMID: 495685. [crossref] [PubMed]
23.
Siderov J, Johnston AW. The importance of the test parameters in the clinical assessment of accommodative facility. Optom Vis Sci. 1990;67(7):551-57. [crossref] [PubMed]
24.
Garcia A, Cacho P, Lara F, Megías R. The relation between accommodative facility and general binocular dysfunction. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 2000;20(2):98-04. PMID: 10829131. [crossref] [PubMed]
25.
Darko-Takyi C, Owusu-Ansah A, Appiah-Eduenu C, Kwasi Abu E, Boadi-KusI SB, Yaw OA, et al. Refractive and binocular vision status of optometry students, Ghana. Journal of Medical and Biomedical.October. 2016;5(2):24-29; ISBN: 2026-6294. Doi:10.4314/jmbs.v5i2.4. [crossref]
26.
Atiya A, Hussaindeen JR, Kasturirangan S, Ramasubramanian S, Swathi K, Swaminathan M, et al. Frequency of undetected binocular vision anomalies among ophthalmology trainees. JOptom. 2020;13(3):185-90. Doi: 10.1016/j. optom.2020.01.003. Epub 2020 May 31. PMID: 32493674; PMCID: PMC7301198. [crossref] [PubMed]
27.
O'Leary DJ, Allen PM. Accommodation functions: Co-dependency and relationship to refractive error March 2006 Vision Research 46(4):491-05 Doi:10.1016/j.visres.2005.05.007. [crossref] [PubMed]
28.
O'Leary DJ, Allen PM. Facility of accommodation in myopia. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 2001;21(5):352-55. Doi: 10.1046/j.1475-1313.2001.00597.x. PMID: 11563421. [crossref] [PubMed]
29.
Jiang BC, White JM. Effect of accommodative adaptation on static and dynamic accommodation in emmetropia and late-onset myopia. Optom Vis Sci. 1999;76(5):295-02. Doi: 10.1097/00006324-199905000-00017. PMID: 10375245. [crossref] [PubMed]

DOI and Others

DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2022/57570.17112

Date of Submission: May 05, 2022
Date of Peer Review: Jun 29, 2022
Date of Acceptance: Aug 16, 2022
Date of Publishing: Oct 01, 2022

AUTHOR DECLARATION:
• Financial or Other Competing Interests: None
• Was Ethics Committee Approval obtained for this study? Yes
• Was informed consent obtained from the subjects involved in the study? Yes
• For any images presented appropriate consent has been obtained from the subjects. NA

PLAGIARISM CHECKING METHODS:
• Plagiarism X-checker: May 12, 2022
• Manual Googling: Aug 01, 2022
• iThenticate Software: Aug 13, 2022 (23%)

ETYMOLOGY: Author Origin

JCDR is now Monthly and more widely Indexed .
  • Emerging Sources Citation Index (Web of Science, thomsonreuters)
  • Index Copernicus ICV 2017: 134.54
  • Academic Search Complete Database
  • Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)
  • Embase
  • EBSCOhost
  • Google Scholar
  • HINARI Access to Research in Health Programme
  • Indian Science Abstracts (ISA)
  • Journal seek Database
  • Google
  • Popline (reproductive health literature)
  • www.omnimedicalsearch.com