A comparative review of methods to record ocular rotations

Abstract

Aim: To review the methods reported for recording ocular rotations. Methods: A literature-based review from 1899 to 2008 was carried out to enable a comparative discussion on the methods available to record ocular rotations. Results: The recording of ocular rotations has changed and progressed over the years. Different methods are available that are essentially either kinetic or static. The important factors in evaluating the efficacy of methods for recording ocular rotations are: minimising patient discomfort; maintaining accuracy and minimising variability from head and chin movement; the speed and simplicity of the test, particularly for elderly patients; good repeatability and level of inter- and intra-observer reliability. Conclusion: No one method has been advocated in the literature as the gold standard. However, clinically the Goldmann perimeter for kinetic recording and the Lees screen for static recording are popular.

Keywords

• Comparison
• Kinetic
• Ocular rotations
• Static