一项调查,以确定屏幕测试使用的认证骨科医生在美国

Q3 Medicine
Michelle S. Attzs, Alex Christoff
{"title":"一项调查,以确定屏幕测试使用的认证骨科医生在美国","authors":"Michelle S. Attzs, Alex Christoff","doi":"10.1080/2576117X.2023.2188837","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Purpose To ascertain the use of screen tests for assessing strabismus under binocular viewing conditions by certified orthoptist colleagues around the United States of America. Methods A link to an online survey was distributed to all 440 registered members of the American Association of Certified Orthoptists in early 2022. A total of 135 certified orthoptists responded. Results Of the 135 respondents, 51% were from a public practice, 36% were private practice and 13% from a mixture of both. A large proportion of respondents did not use binocular screen tests to measure strabismus such as the Lancaster red/green test (85%) or Hess screen test (93%), although one respondent reported using the Harms screen test. Most respondents reported using single or double Maddox rods (75%), synoptophore (44%) and prisms (14%) in their practice to quantify strabismus clinically. Conclusion There is limited use of screen tests in private and public practice in the USA. The ergonomic requirements of such tests are prohibitive to their implementation in modern clinical practice.","PeriodicalId":37288,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Binocular Vision and Ocular Motility","volume":"73 1","pages":"55 - 57"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Survey to Identify Screen Test Usage by Certified Orthoptists Across the United States of America\",\"authors\":\"Michelle S. Attzs, Alex Christoff\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/2576117X.2023.2188837\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Purpose To ascertain the use of screen tests for assessing strabismus under binocular viewing conditions by certified orthoptist colleagues around the United States of America. Methods A link to an online survey was distributed to all 440 registered members of the American Association of Certified Orthoptists in early 2022. A total of 135 certified orthoptists responded. Results Of the 135 respondents, 51% were from a public practice, 36% were private practice and 13% from a mixture of both. A large proportion of respondents did not use binocular screen tests to measure strabismus such as the Lancaster red/green test (85%) or Hess screen test (93%), although one respondent reported using the Harms screen test. Most respondents reported using single or double Maddox rods (75%), synoptophore (44%) and prisms (14%) in their practice to quantify strabismus clinically. Conclusion There is limited use of screen tests in private and public practice in the USA. The ergonomic requirements of such tests are prohibitive to their implementation in modern clinical practice.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37288,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Binocular Vision and Ocular Motility\",\"volume\":\"73 1\",\"pages\":\"55 - 57\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Binocular Vision and Ocular Motility\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/2576117X.2023.2188837\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Binocular Vision and Ocular Motility","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/2576117X.2023.2188837","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

【摘要】目的了解美国眼科医生在双眼视镜条件下评估斜视的筛查方法。方法在2022年初,将在线调查的链接分发给所有440名美国注册骨科医师协会的注册会员。共有135名经过认证的骨科医生做出了回应。结果在135名受访者中,51%来自公共诊所,36%来自私人诊所,13%来自两者的混合。大部分受访者没有使用双目屏幕测试来测量斜视,如兰开斯特红/绿测试(85%)或赫斯屏幕测试(93%),尽管一名受访者报告使用了哈姆斯屏幕测试。大多数受访者报告在临床实践中使用单或双Maddox棒(75%),视光仪(44%)和棱镜(14%)来量化斜视。结论:在美国,在私人和公共实践中,屏幕测试的使用有限。这些测试的人体工程学要求是禁止他们在现代临床实践的实施。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A Survey to Identify Screen Test Usage by Certified Orthoptists Across the United States of America
ABSTRACT Purpose To ascertain the use of screen tests for assessing strabismus under binocular viewing conditions by certified orthoptist colleagues around the United States of America. Methods A link to an online survey was distributed to all 440 registered members of the American Association of Certified Orthoptists in early 2022. A total of 135 certified orthoptists responded. Results Of the 135 respondents, 51% were from a public practice, 36% were private practice and 13% from a mixture of both. A large proportion of respondents did not use binocular screen tests to measure strabismus such as the Lancaster red/green test (85%) or Hess screen test (93%), although one respondent reported using the Harms screen test. Most respondents reported using single or double Maddox rods (75%), synoptophore (44%) and prisms (14%) in their practice to quantify strabismus clinically. Conclusion There is limited use of screen tests in private and public practice in the USA. The ergonomic requirements of such tests are prohibitive to their implementation in modern clinical practice.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
42
×
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