$Accommodation and vergence facility of different level visual complaint and refractive error groups / Amirul Hakim Esa$

Accommodation and vergence facility of different level visual complaint and refractive error groups / Amirul Hakim Esa

Purpose: To compare the monocular accommodation facility (MAF), binocular accommodation facility (BAF) and vergence facility (VF) among low and moderate visual complaint condition between myopic and emmetropic subject. Methods: Fifty-two subjects (19-35 years old) with 6/6 vision at distance, N5 for...

Full description

Saved in:

Bibliographic Details
Main Author:	Esa, Amirul Hakim
Format:	Thesis
Language:	English
Published:	2016
Subjects:	Refraction and errors of refraction and accommodation
Online Access:	https://ir.uitm.edu.my/id/eprint/22391/1/TD_AMIRUL%20HAKIM%20ESA%20HS%20B%2016_5.pdf
Tags:	Add Tag No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!

id	my-uitm-ir.22391
record_format	uketd_dc
spelling	my-uitm-ir.223912018-12-10T04:22:01Z Accommodation and vergence facility of different level visual complaint and refractive error groups / Amirul Hakim Esa 2016 Esa, Amirul Hakim Refraction and errors of refraction and accommodation Optometry. Opticians. Eyeglasses Purpose: To compare the monocular accommodation facility (MAF), binocular accommodation facility (BAF) and vergence facility (VF) among low and moderate visual complaint condition between myopic and emmetropic subject. Methods: Fifty-two subjects (19-35 years old) with 6/6 vision at distance, N5 for near visual acuity, and no history ocular disease participated in the study. Subjects need to answer the survey “Visual Discomfort” by Conlon et al to determine the level of visual complaint. Subjects were classified based on refractive error group before proceeding to next assessment. The monocular accommodation facility (MAF), binocular accommodation facity (BAF) and vergence facility was measured and recorded in cycle per minute (cpm). Results: The result in Kruskall-Wallis test showed no significance difference on MAF (p = 0.382), BAF (p = 0.357) and vergence facility (p = 0.689) in different level of visual complaint and MAF (p = 0.408), BAF (p = 0.221) and Vergence facility (p = 0.412) between myopes and emmetropes. Conclusion: Thus, subject with different level of visual complaint and refractive error groups had no statiscally different on accommodation facility and vergence facility as proposed by the result of current study. 2016 Thesis https://ir.uitm.edu.my/id/eprint/22391/ https://ir.uitm.edu.my/id/eprint/22391/1/TD_AMIRUL%20HAKIM%20ESA%20HS%20B%2016_5.pdf text en public degree Universiti Teknologi MARA, Selangor, Puncak Alam Campus Faculty of Health Science
institution	Universiti Teknologi MARA
collection	UiTM Institutional Repository
language	English
topic	Refraction and errors of refraction and accommodation Refraction and errors of refraction and accommodation
spellingShingle	Refraction and errors of refraction and accommodation Refraction and errors of refraction and accommodation Esa, Amirul Hakim Accommodation and vergence facility of different level visual complaint and refractive error groups / Amirul Hakim Esa
description	Purpose: To compare the monocular accommodation facility (MAF), binocular accommodation facility (BAF) and vergence facility (VF) among low and moderate visual complaint condition between myopic and emmetropic subject. Methods: Fifty-two subjects (19-35 years old) with 6/6 vision at distance, N5 for near visual acuity, and no history ocular disease participated in the study. Subjects need to answer the survey “Visual Discomfort” by Conlon et al to determine the level of visual complaint. Subjects were classified based on refractive error group before proceeding to next assessment. The monocular accommodation facility (MAF), binocular accommodation facity (BAF) and vergence facility was measured and recorded in cycle per minute (cpm). Results: The result in Kruskall-Wallis test showed no significance difference on MAF (p = 0.382), BAF (p = 0.357) and vergence facility (p = 0.689) in different level of visual complaint and MAF (p = 0.408), BAF (p = 0.221) and Vergence facility (p = 0.412) between myopes and emmetropes. Conclusion: Thus, subject with different level of visual complaint and refractive error groups had no statiscally different on accommodation facility and vergence facility as proposed by the result of current study.
format	Thesis
qualification_level	Bachelor degree
author	Esa, Amirul Hakim
author_facet	Esa, Amirul Hakim
author_sort	Esa, Amirul Hakim
title	Accommodation and vergence facility of different level visual complaint and refractive error groups / Amirul Hakim Esa
title_short	Accommodation and vergence facility of different level visual complaint and refractive error groups / Amirul Hakim Esa
title_full	Accommodation and vergence facility of different level visual complaint and refractive error groups / Amirul Hakim Esa
title_fullStr	Accommodation and vergence facility of different level visual complaint and refractive error groups / Amirul Hakim Esa
title_full_unstemmed	Accommodation and vergence facility of different level visual complaint and refractive error groups / Amirul Hakim Esa
title_sort	accommodation and vergence facility of different level visual complaint and refractive error groups / amirul hakim esa
granting_institution	Universiti Teknologi MARA, Selangor, Puncak Alam Campus
granting_department	Faculty of Health Science
publishDate	2016
url	https://ir.uitm.edu.my/id/eprint/22391/1/TD_AMIRUL%20HAKIM%20ESA%20HS%20B%2016_5.pdf
_version_	1783733811829276672

Accommodation and vergence facility of different level visual complaint and refractive error groups / Amirul Hakim Esa

Similar Items