Real Depth vs Randot Stereotests - 18/08/11

Doi : 10.1016/j.ajo.2006.04.065

David A. Leske, BS ^a, Eileen E. Birch, PhD ^b,^c, Jonathan M. Holmes, BM, BCh ^a,^⁎
^a Department of Ophthalmology, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, Minnesota
^b Retina Foundation of the Southwest, Dallas, Texas
^c Department of Ophthalmology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas

Inquiries to Jonathan M. Holmes, BM, BCh, Ophthalmology E7, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, MN 55905

Résumé

Purpose

To compare the performance of real depth and Randot stereotests in strabismic and nonstrabismic patients.

Design

Observational case series.

Methods

Stereoacuity was tested in 182 patients with a variety of strabismic conditions, using the Frisby-Davis 2 (FD2) distance stereotest, the near Frisby (nF) (both real depth tests), the Preschool Randot (nR), and Distance Randot (dR) tests (both based on Polaroid vectographs).

Results

Patients appreciated finer disparities with the nF test than the nR test at near and with the FD2 test than the dR test at distance.

Conclusions

The type of stereotest influences measurable thresholds, and the results from different tests are not interchangeable. The choice of test should depend on the question being asked; nF and FD2 would be appropriate for determining presence or absence of stereopsis and best measurable stereopsis. The more rigorous Randot tests would be appropriate for determining subtle changes.

Le texte complet de cet article est disponible en PDF.

Supported by National Institutes of Health Grants EY015799 and EY011751 (J.M.H.) and EY005236 (E.E.B.), Research to Prevent Blindness, New York, New York (J.M.H. as Olga Keith Weiss Scholar and an unrestricted grant to the Department of Ophthalmology, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine).