Socket motility assessment of anophthalmic sockets: a systematic review

PURPOSE: Systematically review and categorize the methods used to assess socket and prosthetic motility in anophthalmic patients following enucleation or evisceration. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Scopus were searched from inception through September 2024. Studies reporting qualitative or quantitative assessments of motility in anophthalmic sockets or ocular prostheses were included. Motility assessment methods were categorized as qualitative (descriptive or graded clinical evaluation) or quantitative (numerical measurements in millimeters, degrees, or objective tracking systems). RESULTS: Thirty-five studies encompassing 1,819 patients met inclusion criteria. Nineteen studies used qualitative assessment methods, including subjective observation, graded scales based on cardinal gaze positions, or comparison with the contralateral eye. Sixteen studies employed quantitative techniques, such as the Kestenbaum limbus test, Lister perimeter measurements, conjunctival or limbal markings, photographic image analysis, infrared eye-tracking systems, and magnetic search-coil technology. Considerable heterogeneity was observed in measurement techniques, reporting standards, timing of assessment, and distinction between socket and prosthetic motility. CONCLUSIONS: Substantial variability exists in the methods used to assess motility in anophthalmic sockets, limiting comparability across studies. Establishing standardized, feasible, and reproducible assessment approaches may improve outcome reporting and facilitate meaningful comparisons in future oculoplastic research.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Orbit
Published
2026-05-17
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1080/01676830.2026.2671180
Primary Topic
Ocular Disorders and Treatments
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Socket motility assessment of anophthalmic sockets: a systematic review

Mariam Issa, Navdeep Njihawan, Muhannad A. Alnahdi, Georges Nassrallah et al.
Orbit
Ocular Disorders and Treatments
article

Socket motility assessment of anophthalmic sockets: a systematic review

Mariam Issa, Navdeep Njihawan, Muhannad A. Alnahdi, Georges Nassrallah, Dan DeAngelis, Wissam Nassrallah, Edsel Ing, Kenneth Chang, Mariam Abdelghaffar
article en

Abstract

PURPOSE: Systematically review and categorize the methods used to assess socket and prosthetic motility in anophthalmic patients following enucleation or evisceration. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Scopus were searched from inception through September 2024. Studies reporting qualitative or quantitative assessments of motility in anophthalmic sockets or ocular prostheses were included. Motility assessment methods were categorized as qualitative (descriptive or graded clinical evaluation) or quantitative (numerical measurements in millimeters, degrees, or objective tracking systems). RESULTS: Thirty-five studies encompassing 1,819 patients met inclusion criteria. Nineteen studies used qualitative assessment methods, including subjective observation, graded scales based on cardinal gaze positions, or comparison with the contralateral eye. Sixteen studies employed quantitative techniques, such as the Kestenbaum limbus test, Lister perimeter measurements, conjunctival or limbal markings, photographic image analysis, infrared eye-tracking systems, and magnetic search-coil technology. Considerable heterogeneity was observed in measurement techniques, reporting standards, timing of assessment, and distinction between socket and prosthetic motility. CONCLUSIONS: Substantial variability exists in the methods used to assess motility in anophthalmic sockets, limiting comparability across studies. Establishing standardized, feasible, and reproducible assessment approaches may improve outcome reporting and facilitate meaningful comparisons in future oculoplastic research.

Orbit
Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland (IE), University of Alberta (CA), University of Toronto (CA)
Reduced inequalities
Openalex Percentile: Top 5%
Ocular Disorders and Treatments
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.