Reliability study of the Pierce and King-Devick saccade tests

Two simple clinical tests which are currently being used to assess saccadic eye movements are the Pierce and King-Devick saccade tests. Although normative data have been established for both tests, little has been reported in regards to the tests' reliability. Thirty elementary schoolchildren (...

Full description

Saved in:

Bibliographic Details
Published in:	American journal of optometry and physiological optics Vol. 63; no. 6; pp. 419 - 424
Main Authors:	ORIDE, M. K. H, MARUTANI, J. K, ROUSE, M. W, DELAND, P. N
Format:	Journal Article
Language:	English
Published:	Baltimore, MD Williams & Wilkins 01-06-1986
Subjects:	Biological and medical sciences Child Eye Movements Humans Investigative techniques of ocular function and vision Investigative techniques, diagnostic techniques (general aspects) Medical sciences Saccades Vision Tests - standards Human Eye disease School age Test Vision Exploration Child Saccadic eye movement
Online Access:	Get full text
Tags:	Add Tag No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!

Description
Summary:	Two simple clinical tests which are currently being used to assess saccadic eye movements are the Pierce and King-Devick saccade tests. Although normative data have been established for both tests, little has been reported in regards to the tests' reliability. Thirty elementary schoolchildren (group I) were screened for visual abnormalities and then presented the two saccade tests in random order. These children were retested 2 weeks later by a different group of testers. A second group of 33 children (group II) who also passed the screening for visual abnormalities was administered the two saccade tests. This group was tested by the original testers who also tested the children in group I initially. Comparing initial and retest scores of group I showed poor reliability for both Pierce and King-Devick saccade tests. Thus there is some question as to the tests' clinical usefulness in both evaluating eye movements and monitoring progress of patients undergoing oculomotor therapy. Scores obtained from the initial testing of group I were compared with scores from group II. The same testers administered the tests for both groups. Results showed that tester behavior influenced the retest results of the Pierce saccade test, but results were inconclusive for the King-Devick saccade test.
Bibliography:	ObjectType-Article-2 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-1 ObjectType-News-3 content type line 23
ISSN:	0093-7002 2330-9512