This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Reply to article  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Citing articles on ISI (4)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal

Arch Ophthalmol. 1999;117:250.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

INSURANCE COMPANIES and managed care providers continue to challenge the medical necessity and indications for many cases of adult strabismus surgery. The rationale of their medical reviewers is usually based on the idea that the only valid indications for strabismus surgery are to achieve fusion or to correct diplopia. They assume incorrectly that unless perfect (bifoveal) fusion can be obtained, there will be no improvement in fusion at all. Adults with residual or recurrent strabismus from childhood usually do not report diplopia. The general understanding in our profession is that bifoveal fusion cannot be achieved as an adult unless it was previously present in childhood. Thus, some claims for coverage for these types of cases are rejected. This continues despite continually expanding data on the efficacy of adult strabismus surgery, including a previous editorial in this journal.¹

Adults with long-standing or recurrent childhood strabismus may not report diplopia (the perception . . . [Full Text of this Article]

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Opinions of dating agents about strabismic subjects' ability to find a partner
Mojon-Azzi et al.
Br. J. Ophthalmol. 2008;92:765-769.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT