The level of suppression found in the described method is dependent on the underlying cause of the amblyopia, previous treatment, use of refractive correction and visual acuity. Because each patient has a very unique history, it is difficult to define 'normal' values of suppression or make comparisons between people. Generally we expect those with worse visual acuity to have a deeper level of suppression9. During training, as we reduce the contrast imbalance between the eyes, the depth of suppression typically reduces and this improves a range of binocular and monocular functions. This change in suppression has been demonstrated in several patient populations (see Figures 3 and 4 in reference12, Table 3 and Figure 9 in reference 15 and Figure 2 in reference 16). It is important to note that detailed measurements of suppression using this technique have the potential to enhance our understanding of the amblyopia syndrome.

Figure 1. The equipment used for measuring suppression which includes 1) laptop 2) goggles 3) signal splitter.

Figure 2. The goggles fitted correctly on a study participant.

Figure 3. An overview of the random dot kinetogram stimuli (Step 1.2/1.3). The top panel demonstrates the alignment phase where a half cross is displayed to each eye monocularly as a cue for binocular alignment. The middle panel demonstrates the signal to noise paradigm where signal dots are presented to the amblyopic eye only and the noise dots are presented to the fellow eye, under binocular conditions the signal and noise are combined to give a motion coherence threshold which is then utilized in the contrast varying stage of the measurement. The bottom panel demonstrates the contrast threshold, this procedure uses the motion coherence threshold at a fixed level of signal to noise, and displays varying contrast levels between the two eyes. The point at which the two eyes see a balanced binocular input is the contrast threshold or "balance point".

Figure 4. (Step 1.7) Alignment screens as seen through the goggles, horizontal and vertical arrow keys are used to align targets until an entire cross is seen.

Figure 5. An overview of the training protocol.

Figure 6. Example of clinical and psychophysical data obtained from one adult participant with strabismic amblyopia who completed the training procedure (steps 2.1 to 2.4). Figure 6A demonstrates the change in visual acuity (measured with a logarithmic style chart in logMAR units over four weeks of training for both the amblyopic eye (AME) and fellow eye (FFE)). Smaller LogMAR values indicate better visual acuity. The cumulative number of hours of game play is shown in brackets on the x-axis. Figure 6B demonstrates the change in contrast imbalance over four weeks of training. The y-axis shows the contrast that could be tolerated in the fellow eye, therefore larger values indicate less suppression. At the start of training only 30% contrast could be tolerated in the fellow eye before the amblyopic eye was suppressed. However as training progressed, more contrast could be tolerated indicating a reduction in suppression. Figure 6C shows the improvement in stereoacuity over the training period (measured with the Randot stereo test). Zero on the y-axis indicates no stereo vision and increasing values indicate improving stereo sensitivity (units are the reciprocal of the stereo threshold in seconds of arc).

Figure 7. Standard clinical tests used to assess binocular vision status before and after training including the Worth 4 dot test (top left), Bagollini lenses (top right), Randot Stereopsis test (bottom left) and TNO stereopsis test (bottom right).