We have located links that may give you full text access.
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Balance control in glaucoma.
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science 2012 November
PURPOSE: To examine postural stability in glaucoma patients and subjects with no ocular disease.
METHODS: Twenty-four glaucoma (G) and 24 control (C) subjects participated (mean age [SD] G: 65.9 [5.5] years; C: 68.3 [5.2] years). Postural stability was measured using a force-balance platform under four conditions: eyes open/closed standing on a firm surface and eyes open/closed on a foam surface. Average magnitude of center of foot pressure displacement (root mean square [RMS]) was calculated in the anteroposterior (AP) direction. The Romberg Quotient (RQ) was used to evaluate the visual contribution to balance. The difference in sway between firm and foam standing evaluated the relative somatosensory contribution to balance. The binocular mean deviation (BinMD) score was calculated from Humphrey 24-2 SITA strategy tests.
RESULTS: Glaucoma patients had a lower visual contribution to sway (AP RQ, G = 1.65 [0.44]; AP RQ, C = 2.25 [0.53], P = 0.0001), and higher relative somatosensory contribution to sway (change in AP RMS EYES open firm to foam standing: G = 4.12 [1.85] mm, C = 2.22 [2.04] mm, P = 0.002). BinMD was a significant predictor of balance (AP RQ versus BinMD β-coefficient = 0.58, P = 0.0001; change in AP RMS [eyes open "firm" to "foam"] versus BinMD β-coefficient = -0.35, P = 0.02).
CONCLUSIONS: Glaucoma patients display differences in their visual and somatosensory contributions to quiet standing balance compared with control subjects, associated with the degree of binocular visual field loss. This suggests that balance control may be compromised in this patient group.
METHODS: Twenty-four glaucoma (G) and 24 control (C) subjects participated (mean age [SD] G: 65.9 [5.5] years; C: 68.3 [5.2] years). Postural stability was measured using a force-balance platform under four conditions: eyes open/closed standing on a firm surface and eyes open/closed on a foam surface. Average magnitude of center of foot pressure displacement (root mean square [RMS]) was calculated in the anteroposterior (AP) direction. The Romberg Quotient (RQ) was used to evaluate the visual contribution to balance. The difference in sway between firm and foam standing evaluated the relative somatosensory contribution to balance. The binocular mean deviation (BinMD) score was calculated from Humphrey 24-2 SITA strategy tests.
RESULTS: Glaucoma patients had a lower visual contribution to sway (AP RQ, G = 1.65 [0.44]; AP RQ, C = 2.25 [0.53], P = 0.0001), and higher relative somatosensory contribution to sway (change in AP RMS EYES open firm to foam standing: G = 4.12 [1.85] mm, C = 2.22 [2.04] mm, P = 0.002). BinMD was a significant predictor of balance (AP RQ versus BinMD β-coefficient = 0.58, P = 0.0001; change in AP RMS [eyes open "firm" to "foam"] versus BinMD β-coefficient = -0.35, P = 0.02).
CONCLUSIONS: Glaucoma patients display differences in their visual and somatosensory contributions to quiet standing balance compared with control subjects, associated with the degree of binocular visual field loss. This suggests that balance control may be compromised in this patient group.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Diagnosis and Management of Cardiac Sarcoidosis: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.Circulation 2024 April 19
Essential thrombocythaemia: A contemporary approach with new drugs on the horizon.British Journal of Haematology 2024 April 9
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app