ArticleActa ophthalmologica2022
A comparative study of various prism adaptation forms in the surgical management of esophoria.
Article in Acta ophthalmologica, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Quantification of Gaze-Dependent Corrective Errors With Fresnel Prisms: Implications for Strabismus Management.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2026Article
- Surgical outcomes of bilateral medial rectus recession in cases of acute acquired comitant esotropia.BMC ophthalmology · 2025Article
- Acute acquired comitant esotropia: Current understanding of its etiological classification and treatment strategies.Taiwan journal of ophthalmologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the outcome in participants who underwent surgery for esophoria following one of three different methods of preoperative prism adaptation test (PAT).
methodsThis prospective, multicentre study was carried out at five eye departments from 2012 to 2019. 116 participants were included and allocated to three groups as per investigator choice: Group 1 (n = 55) had a short prism adaptation period ranging from 1 to 5 hours during their visit at the clinic. Group 2 (n = 36) underwent partial prism correction for at least 4 weeks before surgery. Group 3 (n = 25) underwent full prism correction for at least 4 weeks before surgery. Motoric success was determined by postoperative angle of deviation (AOD), and sensoric success was evaluated with Lang and Bagolini striated lens test.
resultsA significant increase (p < 0.001) in AOD after PAT was observed in all groups, with no significant difference between groups (distance: p = 0.22; near: p = 0.31). Motoric and sensoric success was comparable between groups 3 months (p = 0.52; p = 0.55) and 1 year (p = 0.53; p = 0.29) after surgery. Prolonged prism adaptation (n = 24) for more than 365 days was not associated with better results.
conclusionOur study indicates that the postoperative result is independent from the duration and amount (partial or full correction) of prism adaptation before surgery at least up to one year of follow-up. Prolonged prism adaptation (>365 days) before surgery does not improve the results.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.