The Mallett Fixation Disparity Test: influence of test instructions and relationship with symptoms
- PMID: 16918777
- DOI: 10.1111/j.1475-1313.2006.00385.x
The Mallett Fixation Disparity Test: influence of test instructions and relationship with symptoms
Abstract
Fixation disparity is a minute ocular misalignment under conditions of binocular single vision and is typically detected in primary eye care practices in the UK using the Mallett Unit Fixation Disparity Test. This instrument creates natural viewing conditions, when the patient's binocular system is fused using both central and peripheral fusion locks. This allows the examiner to determine the minimum prism power that eliminates the fixation disparity: the associated phoria or aligning prism. The spherical power that eliminates the fixation disparity, the aligning sphere, can also be determined. The near Mallett Unit Fixation Disparity Test has been shown to have good sensitivity and specificity for detecting symptomatic heterophoria. Cases of decompensated heterophoria tend to have a fixation disparity and the aligning prism or aligning sphere is a good indicator of the correction that will render the heterophoria compensated. The purpose of this study was, for the first time, to investigate the effect of test instructions on the results of the Mallett Unit Fixation Disparity Test. In study 1, we surveyed and observed practitioners to determine the instructions that are typically used. In study 2, we compared results obtained with this "standard" method of questioning with a more "specific" form of questioning that has been suggested in the literature. The participants for study 2 were 105 patients aged 7-70 years who were randomly selected from those attending a community optometric practice. Significantly different results were obtained with the two sets of instructions. The specific form of questioning revealed more cases of fixation disparity and the results with this method showed a better correlation with symptoms. This only held for near vision: for distance vision, symptoms were not significantly correlated with the presence of fixation disparity. This agrees with previous work with the Mallett unit, which showed a significant relationship with symptoms only at near. We also found that patients with more severe symptoms had greater degrees of aligning prism. Our study supports previous work indicating that the Mallett unit is a useful tool for detecting symptomatic heterophoria at near. However, we found that the testing method is important: patients need to be asked not just whether the nonius strips are aligned but also whether one or both of the strips ever moves. More research is needed to investigate the significance of precise test instructions in other optometric and orthoptic tests.
Comment in
-
Fixation disparity with a so-called "central" fusion lock.Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 2006 Sep;26(5):523; author reply 524. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-1313.2006.00422.x. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 2006. PMID: 16918778 No abstract available.
Similar articles
-
Does an iPad fixation disparity test give equivalent results to the Mallett near fixation disparity test?J Optom. 2019 Oct-Dec;12(4):222-231. doi: 10.1016/j.optom.2019.03.002. Epub 2019 Sep 7. J Optom. 2019. PMID: 31501055 Free PMC article.
-
The Near Mallett Unit Foveal Suppression Test: a cross-sectional study to establish test norms and relationship with other optometric tests.Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 2007 Jan;27(1):31-43. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-1313.2006.00453.x. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 2007. PMID: 17239188
-
Double-masked randomised placebo-controlled trial of the effect of prismatic corrections on rate of reading and the relationship with symptoms.Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 2006 Nov;26(6):555-65. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-1313.2006.00400.x. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 2006. PMID: 17040419 Clinical Trial.
-
Heterophoria and fixation disparity: a review.Strabismus. 2000 Jun;8(2):127-34. Strabismus. 2000. PMID: 10980694 Review.
-
Fixation disparity: clinical implications and utilization.J Am Optom Assoc. 1991 Dec;62(12):923-33. J Am Optom Assoc. 1991. PMID: 1814985 Review.
Cited by
-
Does an iPad fixation disparity test give equivalent results to the Mallett near fixation disparity test?J Optom. 2019 Oct-Dec;12(4):222-231. doi: 10.1016/j.optom.2019.03.002. Epub 2019 Sep 7. J Optom. 2019. PMID: 31501055 Free PMC article.
-
Reply to: Mallett unit or fully fusionable images for prisms against asthenopia?J Optom. 2022 Apr-Jun;15(2):186-187. doi: 10.1016/j.optom.2021.09.006. Epub 2021 Oct 17. J Optom. 2022. PMID: 34670731 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
-
Do dissociated or associated phoria predict the comfortable prism?Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2008 May;246(5):631-9. doi: 10.1007/s00417-008-0798-3. Epub 2008 Apr 1. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2008. PMID: 18379816 Free PMC article.
-
Effects of Prism Eyeglasses on Objective and Subjective Fixation Disparity.PLoS One. 2015 Oct 2;10(10):e0138871. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0138871. eCollection 2015. PLoS One. 2015. PMID: 26431525 Free PMC article.
-
Is the aligning prism measured with the Mallett unit correlated with fusional vergence reserves?PLoS One. 2012;7(8):e42832. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0042832. Epub 2012 Aug 8. PLoS One. 2012. PMID: 22905174 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources