Individual objective versus subjective fixation disparity as a function of forced vergence

Comparison of vergence mechanisms between university students with good and poor sleep quality

AIM

To compare the vergence mechanisms between good and poor sleepers in university students.

METHODS

A total of 64 university students were recruited in this study. The validated Malay version of Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index questionnaire (PSQI-M) was used to measure the participants' sleep quality over the past month. Participants were categorized as good sleepers (n=32) and poor sleepers (n=32) based on the PSQI-M scores. Heterophoria and fusional vergences were measured at distance and near. Mann-Whitney U test was used to compare heterophoria, negative fusional vergence (NFV), and positive fusional vergence (PFV) at distance and near between good and poor sleepers. Spearman correlation analysis was used to study the relationship between PSQI-M score and PFV at distance.

RESULTS

Both distance and near heterophorias were not significantly different between good and poor sleepers (P>0.05). There was a difference in distance PFV (P<0.05) between good and poor sleepers, but not in distance NFV, near NFV, and near PFV (P>0.05). Distance PFV was negatively correlated with PSQI-M score (rs=-0.33, P<0.05).

CONCLUSION

University students with poor sleep quality demonstrates a reduced ability to maintain fusion with increasing convergence demand at distance. Sleep quality assessment during binocular vision examination in university students is recommended.

Topical Review: Methodological Variables in Clinical and Laboratory Measurements of Fixation Disparity

SIGNIFICANCE

Fixation disparity is a small vergence error that does not disrupt fusion. Fixation disparity measures correlate with binocular symptoms. This article covers methodological differences between clinical fixation disparity measurement devices, findings when objective and subjective fixation disparities are compared, and the potential impact of binocular capture on fixation disparity measurements. Fixation disparity is a small vergence error that occurs in nonstrabismic individuals and does not disrupt fusion. This article reviews clinical fixation disparity variables and their clinical diagnostic value. Clinical devices that are used to measure these variables are described, as are studies in which the output from these devices has been compared. Methodological differences between the devices such as the location of the fusional stimulus, the rate at which judgments of dichoptic alignment are made, and the strength of the accommodative stimulus are all considered. In addition, the article covers theories of the neural origins of fixation disparity and control system models incorporating fixation disparity. Studies in which objective fixation disparities (oculomotor portion of fixation disparity assessed with an eye tracker) and subjective fixation disparities (sensory portion of fixation disparity assessed psychophysically with dichoptic Nonius lines) have been compared are also examined, and consideration is given to why some investigators find differences in these measures, whereas other investigators do not. The conclusion thus far is that there are likely complex interactions between vergence adaptation, accommodation, and the location of the fusional stimulus that lead to differences in objective and subjective fixation disparity measures. Finally, capture of the visual direction of monocular stimuli by adjacent fusional stimuli and the implications for fixation disparity measures are considered.

Recent understanding of binocular vision in the natural environment with clinical implications

Technological advances in recent decades have allowed us to measure both the information available to the visual system in the natural environment and the rich array of behaviors that the visual system supports. This review highlights the tasks undertaken by the binocular visual system in particular and how, for much of human activity, these tasks differ from those considered when an observer fixates a static target on the midline. The everyday motor and perceptual challenges involved in generating a stable, useful binocular percept of the environment are discussed, together with how these challenges are but minimally addressed by much of current clinical interpretation of binocular function. The implications for new technology, such as virtual reality, are also highlighted in terms of clinical and basic research application.

Do standard optometric measures predict binocular coordination during reading?

In reading, binocular eye movements are required for optimal visual processing and thus, in case of asthenopia or reading problems, standard orthoptic and optometric routines check individual binocular vision by a variety of tests. The present study therefore examines the predictive value of such standard measures of heterophoria, accommodative and vergence facility, AC/A-ratio, NPC and symptoms for binocular coordination parameters during read-ing. Binocular eye movements were recorded (EyeLink II) for 65 volunteers during a typical reading task and linear regression analyses related all parameters of binocular coordination to all above-mentioned optometric measures: while saccade disconjugacy was weakly pre-dicted by vergence facility (15% explained variance), vergence facility, AC/A and symp-toms scores predicted vergence drift (31%). Heterophoria, vergence facility and NPC ex-plained 31% of fixation disparity and first fixation duration showed minor relations to symp-toms (18%). In sum, we found only weak to moderate relationships, with expected, selective associations: dynamic parameter related to optometric tests addressing vergence dynamics, whereas the static parameter (fixation disparity) related mainly to heterophoria. Most sur-prisingly, symptoms were only loosely related to vergence drift and fixation duration, re-flecting associations to a dynamic aspect of binocular eye movements in reading and poten-tially non-specific, overall but slight reading deficiency. Thus, the efficiency of optometric tests to predict binocular coordination during reading was low - questioning a simple, straightforward extrapolation of such test results to an overlearned, complex task.

Measuring vergence and fixation disparity in 3D space

As the eyes continuously move in 3D space, they rarely converge at the exact depth of the plane even when fixating a 2D image or computer screen. Rather, the lines of gaze measured by eye movement recordings show some misalignment so-called fixation disparity. Fixation disparity occurs in front of or behind the plane, and the eyes may also be lagged vertically. For those reasons, vision research requires mathematical tools to calculate where exactly the lines of gaze cross the stimulus plane. Seminal research on vergence eye movements targeting stimuli lying on isovergence curves has been content with simple computation of the difference between the two eye rotation angles. Recently, the need of new calculations has emerged with the increasing use of eye-trackers providing the eye coordinates on a computer screen. Previous studies have made this attempt but with restrictions. We introduce here a complete calculation of fixation disparity in 3D space allowing vision researchers to study the precision of gaze regardless of the stimulus location in 3D space and of whether the eyes lag horizontally and/or vertically.

Effects of aligning prisms on the objective and subjective fixation disparity in far distance

Fixation disparity (FD) refers to a suboptimal condition of binocular vision. The oculomotor aspect of FD refers to a misadjustment in the vergence angle between the two visual axes that is measured in research with eye trackers (objective fixation disparity, oFD). The sensory aspect is psychophysically tested using dichoptic nonius lines (subjective fixation disparity, sFD). Some optometrists use nonius tests to determine the prisms for constant wear aiming to align the eyes. However, they do not (yet) use eye trackers. We investigate the effect of aligning prisms on oFD and sFD for 60 sec exposure duration of prisms determined with the clinically established Cross test in far distance vision. Without prisms, both types of FD were correlated with the aligning prism, while with prisms the FD was close to zero (these analyses included all base-in and base-out cases). The effect of base-in prisms on oFD was proportional to the amount of the aligning prism for the present 60 sec exposure, similar as for the 2- 5 sec exposure in Schmid et al. (2018). Thus, within 1 minute of prism exposure, no substantial vergence adaptation seems to occur in the present test conditions. Further studies may investigate intra-individual responses to different exposure times of aligning prisms in both prism directions.