Abstract
The accommodative response in 34 patients with accommodative and binocular disorders was assessed with two different techniques of dynamic retinoscopy used in clinical practice: monocular estimate method (MEM) and Nott retinoscopy. The data obtained by both techniques were compared, evaluating the correlation and agreement between them. Results showed that there were statistically significant differences between the techniques with MEM values being more plus than Nott ones. There was a high correlation between the two techniques (0.90) and the regression analysis indicated that a linear relationship existed between MEM and Nott dynamic retinoscopy, so that accommodative lag value for Nott dynamic retinoscopy would be calculated by dividing the MEM result by 2. However, although both retinoscopies were related, there was a lack of agreement between them (+/-0.53 D) indicating that the two methods are not interchangeable for clinical purposes.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
