This Article  • Full text PDF  • Reply to article  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

George B. Bartley, MD; John A. Dyer, MD; DUANE M. Ilstrup, MS
Rochester, Minn

Arch Ophthalmol. 1985;103(7):889-890.

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

In Reply.

—We examined the characteristics of two groups of patients: those who underwent unilateral recession-resection and those who had bimedial rectus recession for childhood esotropia. The possibility of bias due to differences in preoperative variables was discussed in our article, and was taken into consideration when our conclusions were made.

Retrospective studies alone seldom provide sufficient evidence to document the superiority of a particular therapeutic approach. Nevertheless, they do offer a relatively quick and inexpensive means of identifying and quantitating differences in outcome. This information is useful in determining whether a prospective, randomized clinical trial would be desirable and feasible. We agree that such a trial conducted according to a standardized protocol would provide the best evidence concerning whether unilateral recession-resection or bimedial rectus recession is the "better" operation. . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?