Repeatability and comparability of Bagolini Filter Bars
Research type
Research Study
Full title
Repeatability and comparability of different versions of the Bagolini Filter Bar in a paediatric population.
IRAS ID
168722
Contact name
Laura England
Contact email
Duration of Study in the UK
0 years, 9 months, 1 days
Research summary
TITLE: Repeatability and comparability of different versions of the Bagolini Filter Bar in a paediatric population.
QUESTION: Is there a difference in measurement of risk of double vision or strength of binocularity with: (a)a repeated measure of the same bar; (b)different bars of the same version; (c)the new Bagolini Filter Bar compared to the old version.
BACKGROUND:A piece of diagnostic equipment called the Bagolini Filter Bar (BFB) is used regularly in orthoptic assessments for some children receiving patching treatment late in their visual development. The measurement is necessary for some children, to determine whether there is risk of causing double vision with the patching treatment. The original bar is no longer produced and a replacement has been manufactured, but orthoptists have noticed differences between the two versions. No completed studies were found that include children to compare the two versions.
METHODS: 33 5-12year olds, with a squint in one eye, will be recruited from the Orthoptic Department at Chesterfield Royal Hospital. Parental consent will be received and data will be collected, usually at the end of a routine appointment. A repeated measures design will be used where each participant completes the diagnostic test with 2 bars of each version in addition to a repeated measure with one old and one new bar. Each test will involve looking at a torch through up to 17 red filters of increasing density on the BFB. The participant will report when the torch changes colour or 2 torches are seen.
RESULTS: 6 groups of nonparametric data will exist for analysis. The Friedman test will test for any difference between groups. The Wilcoxon signed rank test will analyse different groups of data to address the research questions.REC name
East of England - Cambridgeshire and Hertfordshire Research Ethics Committee
REC reference
14/EE/1268
Date of REC Opinion
21 Nov 2014
REC opinion
Favourable Opinion