Related Experiment Video
Updated: Nov 27, 2025
05:14
Comparison of Agreement and Accuracy using Binocular Wavefront Optometer with Autorefractor and Phoropter
Published on: September 16, 2025
390
Comparisons of proximal vergence measures
1The Ohio State University College of Optometry.
Vision Development and Rehabilitation
|December 7, 2020
Summary
This study compared methods for calculating proximal vergence, a measure of eye movement. Clinically relevant methods yielded similar results, though individual differences were noted.
Area of Science:
- Ophthalmology and Vision Science
- Neuroscience
- Human Physiology
Background:
- Proximal vergence is a specific type of vergence eye movement triggered by the perception of nearness.
- Understanding proximal vergence is crucial for diagnosing and managing various binocular vision disorders.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare proximal vergence values calculated with and without considering accommodation.
- To evaluate the clinical utility of different measurement methods for proximal vergence.
Main Methods:
- Thirteen participants (ages 22-37) underwent heterophoria measurement using the Modified Thorington technique under varying lens conditions (+0.00D, +1.00D, +2.50D).
- Proximal vergence was calculated using four methods: stimulus AC/A differencing, response AC/A differencing, uncorrected +2.50D method, and corrected +2.50D method (accounting for accommodation).
Main Results:
- Mean proximal vergence values varied across methods, ranging from 5.13 ± 2.98Δ (corrected +2.50D) to 8.29 ± 3.30Δ (response AC/A differencing).
- The stimulus AC/A differencing method and the uncorrected +2.50D method showed significant correlation and non-significant differences, suggesting clinical comparability.
Conclusions:
- Accounting for response accommodation impacts proximal vergence measurements.
- The stimulus AC/A differencing and uncorrected +2.50D methods, likely for clinical use, produced similar mean values, but individual variations warrant attention.
