Comparisons of Proximal Vergence Measures

Background: Proximal vergence is defined as a vergence eye movement subtype driven by an “awareness of nearness”. The purpose of this experiment was to compare values of proximal vergence calculated with and without measures of accommodation to assess the clinical utility of each measurement method. Methods: Thirteen participants between the ages of 22 and 37 (mean = 28.5 ± 4.5 years) were enrolled. The distance and near heterophoria were measured using the Modified Thorington technique. The near heterophoria was measured under three randomized viewing conditions (no lenses, +1.00D lenses, +2.50D lenses). Refractive error was measured with an autorefractor. Proximal vergence was calculated as the difference in calculated (far-near) and gradient (+1.00) stimulus AC/A ratios (stimulus AC/A differencing method), the difference in calculated and gradient response AC/A ratios (response AC/A differencing method), and the change in vergence from distance to near with the +2.50D lenses (uncorrected +2.50D method). This latter value was also corrected for any active accommodation with +2.50D lenses (corrected +2.50D method). Results: The mean proximal vergence values (Δ) were 7.82 ± 5.98 (stimulus AC/A differencing method), 8.29 ± 3.30 (response AC/A differencing method), 6.23 ± 3.52 (uncorrected +2.50D method), and 5.13 ± 2.98 (corrected +2.50D method). The only comparison that showed both a significant correlation (p<0.05) and a non-significant difference from the paired t-test (p>0.05) was that between the stimulus AC/A differencing method and the uncorrected +2.50D method. Conclusions: When response accommodation was accounted for, differences occurred in the mean proximal values obtained with the various methods. The means of the methods most likely to be used clinically (stimulus AC/A differencing method and uncorrected +2.50D method) were similar, although some individuals demonstrated significant differences between these methods.