Real Depth v Randot tereotet

Purpoe To compare the performance of real depth and Randot tereotet in trabimic and nontrabimic patient. Deign Obervational cae erie. Method tereoacuity wa teted in 182 patient with a variety of trabimic condition, uing the Friby-Davi 2 (FD2) ditance tereotet, the near Friby (nF) (both real depth tet), the Prechool Randot (nR), and Ditance Randot (dR) tet (both baed on Polaroid vectograph). Reult Patient appreciated finer diparitie with the nF tet than the nR tet at near and with the FD2 tet than the dR tet at ditance. Concluion The type of tereotet influence meaurable threhold, and the reult from different tet are not interchangeable. The choice of tet hould depend on the quetion being aked; nF and FD2 would be appropriate for determining preence or abence of tereopi and bet meaurable tereopi. The more rigorou Randot tet would be appropriate for determining ubtle change.