| Name: | Description: | Size: | Format: | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 969.98 KB | Adobe PDF |
Authors
Advisor(s)
Abstract(s)
Com o aumento da realização de tarefas em visão próxima, o sistema visual
tende a tornar-se menos eficaz e a desenvolver sinais e sintomas relacionados com
disfunções binoculares e/ou acomodativas. A maioria dos estudos que abordam as
prevalências de disfunções binoculares não estrábicas e acomodativas analisam
populações não randomizadas, o tamanho das amostras são reduzidos ou apresentam
diversas faixas etárias, o que torna a comparação entre estudos limitada. Outro dos
fatores são também os critérios de diagnóstico utilizados, uma vez que são bastante
variáveis entre autores.
O objetivo principal deste estudo foi avaliar a prevalência de disfunções
binoculares não estrábicas e acomodativas numa população de estudantes
universitários da Universidade da Beira Interior (UBI) e verificar as possíveis relações
entre as disfunções visuais com diversos fatores sociodemográficos (género e faculdade
de estudo) e clínicos (sintomatologia e compensação ótica).
Metodologia: A amostra final contou com a participação de 309 universitários
com idades compreendidas entre os 18 e os 35 anos. Foram avaliados os dados
sociodemográficos e clínicos, bem como a visão binocular não estrábica e a função
acomodativa. Através de critérios de diagnóstico elaborados, os participantes foram
divididos em dois grupos: sujeitos com visão binocular normal (VBN) e sujeitos com
visão binocular alterada (VBA). Aplicou-se estatística inferencial não paramétrica
(Kruskal-Wallis e Mann-Whitney) para se verificar se a visão binocular e a visão
binocular alterada variavam segundo características sociodemográficas e clínicas.
Resultados: Ao nível da sintomatologia, cerca de 31,4% dos participantes foram
considerados sintomáticos. Foram avaliadas as diferenças estatísticas entre a
sintomatologia e as diversas características sociodemográficas (género e faculdade) e
clínicas (compensação ótica), onde não foram encontradas diferenças estatisticamente
significativas. Cerca de 64,7% dos participantes foram caracterizados como VBA e
35,3% com VBN. As variáveis género e sintomatologia foram consideradas
estatisticamente significativas para a visão binocular, apresentando valores de pvalue=0,03 e p-value= 0,01, respetivamente. O excesso acomodativo (EAcc) e a
insuficiência de convergência (IC) foram as disfunções acomodativas e vergênciais mais
frequentes, com 13,6% e 8,7%, respetivamente. A disfunção binocular associada à
disfunção acomodativa mais frequente foi a insuficiência de convergência associada à
insuficiência acomodativa (IAcc) com 1,93%. Conclusão: O presente estudo apresenta percentagens superiores a outros
estudos de estudantes universitários encontrados na literatura. Constatou-se que os
critérios de diagnóstico baseados na literatura científica apresentaram alguma
diversidade na classificação das alterações binoculares e acomodativas. Verificou-se
também que os estudos de prevalência deste tipo de disfunções omitem as
características dos sujeitos normais.
With the increase of tasks in close vision, the visual system tends to become less effective and develop signs and symptoms related to binocular and/or accommodative dysfunctions. Most studies about the prevalence of binocular and accommodative disorders analyze non-randomized populations, sample sizes are small or have different age groups, which makes that comparison between studies limited. Another fact is the diagnostic criteria used, which are very different among authors. The main objective of this study was to evaluate the prevalence of binocular and accommodative disorders in a student population at the University of Beira Interior and to verify the possible relationships between visual disorders with various sociodemographic (gender and faculty of study) and clinical (symptomatology and optical compensation) factors. Methodology: The final sample included the participation of 309 university students between 18 and 35 years. Sociodemographic and clinical data, such as binocular vision and accommodative function were evaluated. Through elaborated specific diagnostic criteria, the participants were divided into two groups: subjects with normal binocular vision and subjects with altered binocular vision. Nonparametric inferential statistics (Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney) were applied to verify if binocular vision or altered binocular vision vary according to sociodemographic and clinical characteristics. Results: About 31,4% of the participants were considered symptomatic. Statistical differences between the level of symptoms and sociodemographic and clinical characteristics were evaluated, where no statistically significant differences were found. About 64,7% of the participants were characterized as altered binocular vision and 35,3% with normal binocular vision. The gender and level of symptomatology variables were considered statistically significant for the different categories of binocular vision (p-value= 0,03 and p-value=0,01, respectively). The accommodative excess and convergence insufficiency were the most accommodative and vergence dysfunctions found with 13,6% and 8,7%, respectively. The most common binocular dysfunction associated with accommodative dysfunction was convergence insufficiency associated with accommodative insufficiency with 1,93%. Conclusion: The study has higher percentages than other studies of university students found in the literature, however some studies of children have identical prevalence. The diagnostic criteria based on the scientific literature showed some diversity in the classification of binocular and accommodative alterations. It was also found that studies on the prevalence of this type of dysfunction omit the characteristics of normal subjects.
With the increase of tasks in close vision, the visual system tends to become less effective and develop signs and symptoms related to binocular and/or accommodative dysfunctions. Most studies about the prevalence of binocular and accommodative disorders analyze non-randomized populations, sample sizes are small or have different age groups, which makes that comparison between studies limited. Another fact is the diagnostic criteria used, which are very different among authors. The main objective of this study was to evaluate the prevalence of binocular and accommodative disorders in a student population at the University of Beira Interior and to verify the possible relationships between visual disorders with various sociodemographic (gender and faculty of study) and clinical (symptomatology and optical compensation) factors. Methodology: The final sample included the participation of 309 university students between 18 and 35 years. Sociodemographic and clinical data, such as binocular vision and accommodative function were evaluated. Through elaborated specific diagnostic criteria, the participants were divided into two groups: subjects with normal binocular vision and subjects with altered binocular vision. Nonparametric inferential statistics (Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney) were applied to verify if binocular vision or altered binocular vision vary according to sociodemographic and clinical characteristics. Results: About 31,4% of the participants were considered symptomatic. Statistical differences between the level of symptoms and sociodemographic and clinical characteristics were evaluated, where no statistically significant differences were found. About 64,7% of the participants were characterized as altered binocular vision and 35,3% with normal binocular vision. The gender and level of symptomatology variables were considered statistically significant for the different categories of binocular vision (p-value= 0,03 and p-value=0,01, respectively). The accommodative excess and convergence insufficiency were the most accommodative and vergence dysfunctions found with 13,6% and 8,7%, respectively. The most common binocular dysfunction associated with accommodative dysfunction was convergence insufficiency associated with accommodative insufficiency with 1,93%. Conclusion: The study has higher percentages than other studies of university students found in the literature, however some studies of children have identical prevalence. The diagnostic criteria based on the scientific literature showed some diversity in the classification of binocular and accommodative alterations. It was also found that studies on the prevalence of this type of dysfunction omit the characteristics of normal subjects.
Description
Keywords
Acomodação Disfunções Visuiais Estudantes Visão Binocular