Some of you who own the book "Advanced Opticians Tutorial" might already know this ... But what is correct answer for this question???:
When performing the cover/uncover test, the right eye moves inward when it is uncovered. The eye may have a ______ phoria
A. Hyper
B. Hypo
C. Eso
D. Exo
The book says the answer is D.
Is that correct?
Yes, that is correct. When the eye is covered, it moved out indicating an exo deviation. When uncovered, it would move inward toward ortho.
Thanks Warren.
Diane
Anything worth doing is worth doing well.
Page 51 from "Advanced Opticians Tutorial":Originally Posted by NMoptic
"This process can be repeated several times until you have correctly noted the direction of eye movement as the eye is uncovered. If the eye moves in when uncovered , it has an Eso deviation ..."
From that text, I say to myself, the book is telling me, "The ENDING POSITION of the eye is defined as, ' as the eye is uncovered' "
So is the study material from page 51 incorrect?
Last edited by NMoptic; 02-22-2015 at 05:50 PM.
When the eye is covered it moved to its natural position of rest, and most have some degree of phoria. Most myopes will have exo tendencies. From your question it appears the eye turns our when covered. When you uncover, it moves back to orthophoric position (if you are not familiar with that look it up!). It moved in from an out position inward, so d was the correct answer. Think of a squint for a moment......it is always present, correct? A deviation in is an eso deviation, exo is out, hyper up and hypo down. Simple, basic information I hope someone has taught you along the lines someplace. In phoria, it is more subtle. The deviation is not always obvious, and only when we break fusion do we move to the natural position of rest. There is more to your question here, but I suspect is all about the context in which your read the material. It is an eso deviation, in that it moves inward, but remember.......it started from in an exophoric position (out), so the patient was exo when the eye was covered. Hope that helps.
May I suggest something, and please take it the way it is intended. I have been watching with great interest your many questions here, some that are very basic that you do not seem to grasp, like the WTR post. I am not sure if you are a student, an apprentice, whatever.......but you list yourself as an Optician. You need to really understand the basics before moving on to advanced materials. There are a number of places to get an education today, so consider one of the online programs, or even the Career Progression Program at NAO. We in Opticianry throw folks like you to the wolves to learn on your own, and I applaud your efforts, but you need to find someone with a good understanding of the material and not just a person who can make a pretty pair of spectacles if you want to learn optics.....especially advanced material. Find your education where you can. You are in a state that has the stiff requirements of a pulse to become an Optician, and I suspect you will meet many who consider themselves very good, but find to find someone with a real understanding of optics will be hard to do there. I wish you good luck. If you were closer to me, and I would meet with your regularly. Anyone as hungry as you is a breath of fresh air in a world where most just try to get the very minimum. Good luck to you!
I'm guessing one of you will tell me I need to pay attention to the study material's, "...as the eye is uncovered..." and compare it to the question's, "...when it is uncovered..." ???
Thanks for clearing that up for me ... I am making notes from what you told me, "it starts from an OUT position" ... And then UNCOVERING it (like the test question says) brings it back to ortho (normal). So from the question, and from what I need to know from the cover/uncover test, I need to know, or care about, what is happening BEHIND the occluder??
Yes you are correct ... I am trying my best to learn from other books as well. If I lived in a bigger city I would have more opportunities to find people to help. But I have no one here. Even people at the clinic I work at don't have the tools to train me for ABOC-AC.
Also, while we are on the subject of errors in "Advanced Optician's Tutorial"
On page 46, it gives an example for explaining Keratometry with a patient that has K readings of "42.50 @ 180 / 43.75 @ 90 would have 1.25D of 'With The Rule' corneal astigmatism"
And the text says, "In the example, if the patient was neither myopic nor hyperopic and had no internal astigmatism, the spectacle Rx to correct the astigmatism would be Plano - 1.25 X 189"
Do they really mean Axis at 189 !!?? -- That could be very confusing because axis 189 actually exists in quadrant III of the optical cross!
C'mon now. Given the information in the example, the axis of 189 is a typo.
pl-1.25x180 or pl+1.25x90 either would describe the rx needed.
Make sure you are looking to understand concepts and don't get hung up on typos. This one you found is probably not the only one. Trust your knowledge more than that and if you don't, just keep working on it. I admire your determination.
Go to any text. Find the Unilateral Cover/Uncover test. Part of a basic refraction to test for phoria.
It is all in the context of the question, which is advanced for a rookie. This person needs some guidance which will be difficult to deliver here. The basic material should be mastered prior to advanced.
Last edited by wmcdonald; 02-22-2015 at 08:29 PM.
It's a substantial typo. Missing a period or comma is one thing (which the book has those too) but an axis of 189 still exists as a possible answer.
I remember seeing that typo and others in 2011 in this same book (memory is starting to come back to me from re-reading this book), and it's kind of sad that 4 years later that it hasn't been fixed. I paid close to $300 for this book.
While I do not have the manual......from your post, it appears the Keratometer measures the 180 meridian and it is found to be 42.50D, and 43.75D in the 90 meridian. With the rule indicates the steeper meridian is vertical, and so this is WTR. Subtract 42.50 from 43.75 and you get the 1.25 D cylinder. That means all of the astigmatism is located on the cornea if the refraction yielded pl-1.25, and the axis would be 180, not 189.
The ABO advanced test defies most test constructing logic. You prepare for so much information that MAY or MAY NOT be on the test. In college science courses, you buy the textbook for said class. You take periodic tests that are based off of specific chapters that you know 100% will be on the test. Some things on the test may come as a surprise ONLY because you did not cover that material sufficiently and did NOT encode it properly/enough in your brain. Why should ABO/NCLE tests be any different than science test structures from college courses? -- Besides the fashion/retail aspect (which I have no clue why that's even included in the ABO/ABOC-AC tests) -- Opticianry works on the periphery of quantum physics and various light-behavior sciences... It's sad to see that it's tests are based off of unpredictable material-- What kind of logic is that?
I am sorry, but I clearly told you what happens behind the occluder. Cover the eye and it goes to its natural position of rest. What do not you not get there? And trust me......you are nowhere near ready for the advanced certification exam. You need a lot of work. I will help you , if you act like it is appreciated, which you do not by the way. These double question marks and frustrated responses will not get it. My best advice......go to school and learn the material. And learn to read while there. You are trying to learn advanced material and do not even know the difference between WTR and ATR astigmatism, and other very basic things.
Adding to that ... I always hear people who finish taking ABO/NCLE tests say "Oh, my test had prism but had nothing about vergence" or "My test had surfacing questions but nothing about anatomy"
People are studying for unpredictable material. It is becoming more apparent why ABO/NCLE certifications are not required nor held in high regard for the industry. Maybe one day that will change. :(
OK.....professor. I am sure you must have a great deal of academic experience, and certainly know better than us poor folks here. But as a tenured full professor, and one who has written and lectured all over the world on this topic, I can assure you it is nowhere near quantum physics. It is simple, basic optics, and all the math required you really learned in elementary school! It is, however, a rigorous exam with a very low pass rate. Dr. Roy Ferguson in Tenn. has the best results of those who teach this material I am aware of at this point, and offers prep exams from time to time. You can find him on this site. Take one of his courses, and maybe you will be better prepared. This is not the place.
The exam is what it is, and while I agree it covers stuff I do not feel should be there either, it is not your decision. You want the certification, and I applaud your effort, but you have to learn the basics first, and you just do not understand that level yet. I wish you the best in your journey, but you have a ways to go.
Thanks for the assistance, but I have just been throwing out a few questions just to see if they can be cleared up. I will in no way use an internet forum as a primary or even secondary source of studying. I wish schools and courses were available for this test, but unfortunately they are not. It's a fledgling certification test that is still evolving each year. I's funny that ABO asks ABOC-AC test passers for their input on what to include on the test -- I guess that's your test constructing panel for you
Yes I know it's nowhere near quantum physics, but the basics of optics deals with light behavior and light behavior is dissected more in degree seeking courses that deal with such concepts as quanta. What I was trying to point out, is that we work in this particular scientific field that can only be ascertained by tests that seem almost entirely unpredictable.
This is related to the lack of preparation in education and training required. Many here have no idea what vergence is, and I can assure you Prentice's Rule is covered significantly in the NOCE. There is so much material available it is ridiculous. The NOCE (ABO) is so ridiculously easy it takes little real knowledge to pass it. Unfortunately, to support my "lack of preparation" comment, the pass rates have been only at the 50% mark, or maybe a little higher in recent years. It is not their fault, but the test is psychometrically developed and reviewed regularly for content. What needs to change t the education and training (or lack thereof) if those taking it. It covers the body of knowledge it is supposed to cover on randomly selected questions from a large bank.
Again, the tests are completely predictable. It is the test-taker that is most often ill-prepared and does not know the material that is the issue. In an experiment some years back, we took a secretary (a young lady with no optical background that did not even wear glasses) at the office of one of the major Opticianry organizations. We got permission to test her after working there for a few months. She read one of the test-prep manuals at the time, and after 30 days she tested and passed with an 82. There are those here who get on this board and can't pass the thing after multiple tries, and many years. Why do you thin that is? Could it be the quality of people we attract now? Easy entry into a "professional" endeavor? It is just that these folks are stupid? You can't fix that! But ignorance you can. None here are stupid......just the opposite. It is this damn system that fails them, just like it is failing you. No one can help them, because most in the field now are so ill-prepared that have no clue how. That is the overarching problem.
And keep in mind, the requirement to be an Optician in New Mexico is a pulse. You will find few to help you there. You are going to have to travel to learn. Call Dr. Ferguson and see when is next class is for the advanced class. He will help, and if you act right I will as well. But before you spout off, know what you are talking about. At this point you are little more than a student, and many of the questions you are asking here are covered in the first year of Opticianry school. Speaking of school......look at J. Sargent Reynolds CC in Virginia. They have an online program that would be very helpful. But I can assure you, the texts they use will have typos as well as any other on the planet. I know......I have written a number of them, and always look back and find something I wrote incorrectly! Having the ability to recognize them is the key. Trying to get through this material on your own will be very tough.
This question is somewhat unclear, since the movement is a comparative.
B
As well, we cannot truly ascertain the final value astigmatism from the Keratometer, considering the frequency of lenticular astigmatism.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks