Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorBuckley, John*
dc.contributor.authorPacey, Ian E.*
dc.contributor.authorScally, Andy J.*
dc.contributor.authorBarrett, Brendan T.*
dc.contributor.authorPanesar, Gurvinder K.*
dc.date.accessioned2015-10-23T11:41:31Z
dc.date.available2015-10-23T11:41:31Z
dc.date.issued2015-11
dc.identifier.citationBuckley JG, Pacey IE, Panesar GK, Scally A and Barrett BT (2015) Prehension of a flanked target in individuals with amblyopia. Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science, 56 (12): 7568-7580.
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10454/7446
dc.descriptionYes
dc.description.abstractReduced binocularity is a prominent feature of amblyopia and binocular cues are thought to be important for prehension. We examine prehension in individuals with amblyopia when the target-object was flanked, thus mimicking everyday prehension. Methods: amblyopes (n=20, 36.4±11.7 years; 6 anisometropic, 3 strabismic, 11 mixed) and visually-normal controls (n=20, 27.5±6.3 years) reached forward, grasped and lifted a cylindrical target-object that was flanked with objects on either (lateral) side of the target, or in front and behind it in depth. Only 6 amblyopes (30%) had measurable stereoacuity. Trials were completed in binocular and monocular viewing, using the better eye in amblyopic participants. Results: Compared to visual normals, amblyopes displayed a longer overall movement time (p=0.031), lower average reach velocity (p=0.021), smaller maximum aperture (p=0.007) and longer durations between object contact and lift (p=0.003). Differences between groups were more apparent when the flankers were in front and behind, compared to either side, as evidenced by significant group-by-flanker configuration interactions for reach duration (p<0.001), size and timing of maximum aperture (p≤0.009), end-of-reach to object-contact (p<0.001), and between object contact and lift (p=0.044), suggesting that deficits are greatest when binocular cues are richest. Both groups demonstrated a significant binocular advantage, in that in both groups performance was worse for monocular compared to binocular viewing, but interestingly, amblyopic deficits in binocular viewing largely persisted during monocular viewing with the better eye. Conclusions: These results suggest that amblyopes either display considerable residual binocularity or that they have adapted to make good use of their abnormal binocularity.
dc.language.isoenen
dc.rights© 2015 Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology (ARVO). Reproduced in accordance with the publisher's self-archiving policy.
dc.subjectAmblyopia
dc.subjectReduced binocularity
dc.subjectBinocular cues
dc.subjectFlanked targets
dc.titlePrehension of a flanked target in individuals with amblyopia
dc.status.refereedYes
dc.date.Accepted2015-10-16
dc.typeArticle
dc.type.versionAccepted manuscript
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.1167/iovs.15-16860
refterms.dateFOA2018-07-25T12:32:08Z


Item file(s)

Thumbnail
Name:
ReachGrasp IOVS Accepted for ...
Size:
800.2Kb
Format:
PDF
Description:
Suppressed
Thumbnail
Name:
ReachGrasp IOVS Accepted for ...
Size:
811.5Kb
Format:
PDF
Description:
Main Article

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record