• 검색 결과가 없습니다.

Comparison of Exodrift between Natural Group and Postoperative Group in Intermittent Exotropia Patients

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2021

Share "Comparison of Exodrift between Natural Group and Postoperative Group in Intermittent Exotropia Patients"

Copied!
7
0
0

로드 중.... (전체 텍스트 보기)

전체 글

Loading

수치

Table 1. Surgical table for moderate angle intermittent exo- exo-tropia PD Unilateral LR recession (mm) 20 8.5 21-24  9 25 10
Table 2. Clinical characteristics of Group 1 and 2
Figure 1. Exodrift 1 and exodrift 2 in each group. In group 2,  exodrift 2 was 7.1 ± 6.9 PD which is more than exodrift 1 of  4.1 ± 5.7 (p = 0.01, paired t-test)
Figure 2. Kaplan-meier survival curve. Group 1 is the ob- ob-servation group who didn’t have a surgery and group 2 is the  surgery group who had a unilateral lateral recession

참조

관련 문서

<Table 5> Difference of limb load asymmetry, postural sway and lumbar flexibility between control group and experimental group(In case

Comparison of mean and standard deviation of capnographic I:E ratio between normal breathing status and respiratory depression status in 21 patients experienced

First, after the Group Art Therapy, the scale of hopelessness depression in the test group decreased significantly in comparison with that before the group

Comparison of the prevalence of Malnutrition and Overweight, Obesity between South Korean families and North Korean refugees families 15 Table 5.. Comparison of the

Diagrams show the spatial distribution of individual trees and stand profile(a), crown projection(b) for Group of Quercus glauca... The comparison of

2) In between-group comparison before and after elastic band exercise, a significant difference was found in the percentage of body fat, fat-free

Results: In this research, in the group with fibromyalgia patients group, systemic lupus erythematosus patients group and without systemic autoimmune

Figure 6.23 Comparison of the average absorption coefficient between the honeycomb panel and HMPP for a 25-mm core thickness.. 174 Figure 6.24 Comparison of STL between