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

Lindsay A. Horan, B. Ticho, A. Khammar, Megan Allen, Birva Shah
{"title":"Is The Convergence Insufficiency Symptom Survey Specific for Convergence Insufficiency? A Prospective, Randomized Study","authors":"Lindsay A. Horan, B. Ticho, A. Khammar, Megan Allen, Birva Shah","doi":"10.3368/aoj.65.1.99","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"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.","PeriodicalId":76599,"journal":{"name":"The American orthoptic journal","volume":"65 1","pages":"103 - 99"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.3368/aoj.65.1.99","citationCount":"21","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The American orthoptic journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3368/aoj.65.1.99","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 21

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.
收敛不足症状调查是针对收敛不足的吗?一项前瞻性随机研究
背景与目的收敛功能不全症状调查(CISS)是一种用于治疗收敛功能不全的结果测量问卷。目前的前瞻性随机试验评估CISS的诊断特异性。患者和方法对118例进行常规眼科检查的青少年患者进行调查。将会聚功能不全(CI)和双眼视力正常(NBV)患者的评分进行比较。此外,在这些组中进行了自我和从业人员管理的CISS评分的比较。结果NBV患者(14.1±11.3,范围0 ~ 43)与CI患者(12.3±6.7,范围3 ~ 28)的平均CISS评分无显著差异;P = 0.32。医生给药组的平均CISS评分(11.4±7.9)低于自我给药组(16.3+11.4);P = 0.007。结论自我管理比执业管理的CISS得分更高。本研究表明,CISS问卷对趋同不足并不具有特异性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信