Comparison of a new digital KM screen test with conventional Hess and Lees screen tests in the mapping of ocular deviations

Rannveig Linda Thorisdottir, Johanna Sundgren, Rafi Sheikh, Jonas Blohmé, Björn Hammar, Sten Kjellström, Malin Malmsjö

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

2 Citations (SciVal)

Abstract

PURPOSE: To evaluate the digital KM screen computerized ocular motility test and to compare it with conventional nondigital techniques using the Hess and Lees screens.

METHODS: Patients with known ocular deviations and a visual acuity of at least 20/100 underwent testing using the digital KM screen and the Hess and Lees screen tests. The examination duration, the subjectively perceived difficulty, and the patient's method of choice were compared for the three tests. The accuracy of test results was compared using Bland-Altman plots between testing methods.

RESULTS: A total of 19 patients were included. Examination with the digital KM screen test was less time-consuming than tests with the Hess and Lees screens (P < 0.001 and P = 0.003, resp., compared with the digital KM screen). Patients found the test with the digital KM screen easier to perform than the Lees screen test (P = 0.009) but of similar difficulty to the Hess screen test (P = 0.203). The majority of the patients (83%) preferred the digital KM screen test to both of the other screen methods (P = 0.008). Bland-Altman plots showed that the results obtained with all three tests were similar.

CONCLUSIONS: The digital KM screen is accurate and time saving and provides similar results to Lees and Hess screen testing. It also has the advantage of a digital data analysis and registration.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)277-280.e6
JournalJAAPOS
Early online date2018 May 28
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2018 Aug

Subject classification (UKÄ)

  • Ophthalmology

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Comparison of a new digital KM screen test with conventional Hess and Lees screen tests in the mapping of ocular deviations'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this