The effects of partial and full correction of refractive errors on sensorial and motor outcomes in children with refractive accommodative esotropia
- 126 Downloads
To investigate the effects of partial and full correction of refractive errors on sensorial and motor outcomes in children with refractive accommodative esotropia (RAE).
The records of pediatric cases with full RAE were reviewed; their first and last sensorial and motor findings were evaluated in two groups, classified as partial (Group 1) and full correction (Group 2) of refractive errors.
The mean age at first admission was 5.84 ± 3.62 years in Group 1 (n = 35) and 6.35 ± 3.26 years in Group 2 (n = 46) (p = 0.335). Mean change in best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) was 0.24 ± 0.17 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) in Group 1 and 0.13 ± 0.16 logMAR in Group 2 (p = 0.001). Duration of deviation, baseline refraction and amount of reduced refraction showed significant effects on change in BCVA (p < 0.05). Significant correlation was determined between binocular vision (BOV), duration of deviation and uncorrected baseline amount of deviation (p < 0.05). The baseline BOV rates were significantly high in fully corrected Group 2, and also were found to have increased in Group 1 (p < 0.05). Change in refraction was − 0.09 ± 1.08 and + 0.35 ± 0.76 diopters in Groups 1 and 2, respectively (p = 0.005). Duration of deviation, baseline refraction and the amount of reduced refraction had significant effects on change in refraction (p < 0.05). Change in deviation without refractive correction was − 0.74 ± 7.22 prism diopters in Group 1 and − 3.24 ± 10.41 prism diopters in Group 2 (p = 0.472). Duration of follow-up and uncorrected baseline deviation showed significant effects on change in deviation (p < 0.05).
Although the BOV rates and BCVA were initially high in fully corrected patients, they finally improved significantly in both the fully and partially corrected patients. Full hypermetropic correction may also cause an increase in the refractive error with a possible negative effect on emmetropization. The negative effect of the duration of deviation on BOV and BCVA demonstrates the significance of early treatment in RAE cases.
KeywordsBinocular vision Hypermetropia Emmetropization Refractive accommodative esotropia
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
All authors have no affiliations with or involvement in any organization or entity with any financial interest in the subject matter or materials discussed in this manuscript.
The present study was carried out in accordance with the Helsinki Declaration Principles, after obtaining the approval of the institutional ethics committee.
For this type of study, formal consent is not required.
- 3.Noorden GK von, Campos EC (2002) Esodeviations. In: Binocular vision and ocular motility. Theory and management of strabismus, 6th ed. CV Mosby, St Louis, pp 311–355Google Scholar
- 4.Raab EL (1982) Ethiologic factors in accommodative esodeviation. Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc 80:657–694Google Scholar
- 9.Guclu H, Gurlu VP, Ozal SA, Ozkurt ZG (2015) Prognostic factors for stereopsis in refractive accommodative esotropia. Pak J Med Sci 31:807–811Google Scholar
- 13.Wilson ME, Bluestein EC, Parks MM (1993) Binocularity in accommodative esotropia. J Pediatr Ophthalmol Strabismus 30:233–236Google Scholar
- 16.Park KA, Kim SA, Oh SY (2010) Long-term changes in refractive error in patients with accommodative esotropia. Ophthalmology 117(2196–2207):e1Google Scholar