...
首页> 外文期刊>American Orthoptic Journal >Is The Convergence Insufficiency Symptom Survey Specific for Convergence Insufficiency? A Prospective, Randomized Study
【24h】

Is The Convergence Insufficiency Symptom Survey Specific for Convergence Insufficiency? A Prospective, Randomized Study

机译:收敛不足症状调查是否专门针对收敛不足?前瞻性随机研究

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

ABSTRACT Background and Purpose: The Convergence Insufficiency Symptom Survey (CISS) is a questionnaire used as an outcome measure in treatment of convergence insufficiency. The current prospective randomized trial evaluates the diagnostic specificity of the CISS. Patients and Methods: Surveys were completed by 118 adolescent patients who presented for routine eye examinations. Scores were compared between patients who could be classified as having convergence insufficiency (CI) or normal binocular vision (NBV). In addition, a comparison was done between self- and practitioner-administered CISS scores within these groups. Results: The mean CISS score did not differ significantly between NBV patients (14.1 ±11.3, range of 0 to 43) and CI patients (12.3 ±6.7, range of 3 to 28); P = 0.32. Mean CISS scores were lower when physician-administered (11.4 ±7.9) than when self-administered (16.3±11.4); P = 0.007. Conclusion: CISS scores tend to be higher when self- vs. practitioner-administered. This study suggests that the CISS questionnaire is not specific for convergence insufficiency.
机译:摘要背景与目的:收敛性不足症状调查(CISS)是一种用于治疗收敛性不足的结果量表。当前的一项前瞻性随机试验评估了CISS的诊断特异性。患者与方法:调查由118名接受常规眼科检查的青少年患者完成。比较了可归为具有收敛性供血不足(CI)或正常双眼视力(NBV)的患者之间的得分。此外,在这些组中,自我管理和从业人员管理的CISS评分之间也进行了比较。结果:NBV患者(14.1±11.3,范围为0至43)和CI患者(12.3±6.7,范围为3至28)之间的平均CISS评分无显着差异; P = 0.32。医师管理时(11.4±7.9)的平均CISS分数低于自我管理时(16.3±11.4)的平均分数; P = 0.007。结论:自我管理与实践管理相比,CISS得分往往更高。这项研究表明,CISS调查问卷并非针对收敛不足的问题。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号