This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Reply to article  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citing articles on Web of Science (2)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

HERMANN M. BURIAN, M.D.

AMA Arch Ophthalmol. 1951;45(4):377-381.

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

WHEN I was invited to speak at this symposium, various topics came to my mind which might profitably be discussed. However, I discarded all specific topics, since it seemed to me that a topic of more general nature would be better suited to a joint gathering of orthopists and ophthalmologists.

I am frequently asked what I really think of orthoptics. I have felt that this question should some time be answered in more elaborate form. This is why I am speaking tonight about the scope and limitations of orthoptics.

Before considering its scope and limitations, one must first agree on a definition of orthoptics. In the broadest sense of the word, every form of nonsurgical treatment of neuromuscular anomalies of the eyes is orthoptic therapy. In this broadest sense the prescription of glasses for the normalization of the convergence-accommodation relationship is a form of orthoptic treatment. If this definition is . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Author Affiliations
BOSTON

From the Department of Ophthalmology of the Boston City Hospital.

Footnotes
The preparation of this paper was assisted by a grant to the author from the National Council to Combat Blindness, Inc.

Read at the joint meeting of the American Orthoptic Council and the American Association of Orthoptic Technicians, Oct. 10, 1950, Chicago.

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