不同颜色光下眼调节幅度及其与屈光度的关系

doi:10.3760/cma.j.issn.1674-845X.2013.04.009

Abstract
Figure/Table
References (17)
Related Citation (15)

Download: PDF (443 KB) HTML (1 KB)
Export: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

Abstract

Objective To measure the binocular accommodative amplitude under different monochromatic lights； to evaluate the differences in accommodative amplitude under different monochromatic lights and the correlation between refractive state and accommodative amplitude. Methods This was a cross-sectional study. Ninety-one subjects （182 eyes）， aged 15~30 years （average 22.9±4.2 years） were enrolled in the study. All subjects underwent refractive examinations measured with MPMVA， amplitude of accommodation measured with a minus lens-stimulated test under white light （440 nm， 560 nm， 610 nm combined light）， red light （610 nm） and green light （560 nm）. A one-way ANOVA and Pearson correlation were used for statistical analysis. Results ①There were significant differences in the amplitude of accommodation under different lights （F=21.49， P<0.01）： the largest amplitude was under white light （13.04±2.75 D）， green light （12.4±2.61 D） was second， and red light （11.26±2.53 D） was the lowest. ②The amplitude of accommodation under the 3 hights was significantly different （F=21.476， 14.356， 16.540， P<0.01） among emmetropes， low and moderate myopes and high myopes. The smallest amplitude was for emmetropes and the amplitude was for high myopes. The amplitudes of accommodation were not significantly different for emmetropes under different lights （F=1.93， P>0.05） while the other two groups showed significant differences （F=15.684， 11.821， P<0.01）. ③There was a positive correlation between the amplitude of accommodation and refraction （r=0.385， 0.312， 0.328， P<0.01）. ④For each individual， the accommodative amplitude was higher with a higher degree of myopia， under red hight， the differences were not significant （t=-1.803， P<0.05）， under white and green lights， the differences were significant （t=-2.344， 2.474， P<0.05）. Conclusion The amplitude of accommodation differs when induced by different lights. It is higher with green light than red light， and there was a significant difference in myopes. The amplitude of accommodation is correlated with refractive error； the higher the degree of myopia， the larger the amplitude of accommodation.

Key words： Chromatic Light Accommodation amplitude Myopia Diopter

Received: 17 April 2012

Corresponding Authors: SHEN Ye

	Service

	E-mail this article
	Add to my bookshelf
	Add to citation manager
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	Articles by authors
	MA Na
	WANG Yang
	SHEN Ye
	LI Xiu-yi

Cite this article:

MA Na,WANG Yang,SHEN Ye等. The disparity in accommodative amplitude under different monochromatic lights and the correlation with refractive state[J]. Chinese Journal of Optometry Ophthalmology and Visual Science, 2013, 15(4): 226-229.

URL:

https://www.cjoovs.com/EN/10.3760/cma.j.issn.1674-845X.2013.04.009 OR https://www.cjoovs.com/EN/Y2013/V15/I4/226

[1]	Harb E， Thorn F， Troilo D. Charateristics of accommodarive behavior during sustained reading in emmetropes and myopes. Vision Res，2006，46：2581-1592.
[2]	Anderson HA， Hentz G， Glasser A， et al. Minus-Lens—Stimulated accommodative amplitude decreases sigmoidally with age. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci，2008，49：2919-2926.
[3]	Seidemann A， Schaeffel F. Effects of longitudinal chromatic aberration on accommodation and emmetropization. Vision Res， 2002，42：2409-2417.
[4]	Liu R， Qian YF， He JC， et al. Effects of different monochromatic lights on refractive development and eye growth in guinea pigs. Exp Eye Res，2011，92：447-453.
[5]	Rucker FJ， Kruger PB. Cone contributions to signals for accommodation and the relationship to refractive error. Vision Res，2006，46：3079-3089.
[6]	齐备. 视光调节幅度检测方法. 实用医院临床杂志，2009，7：39-41.
[7]	Schaeffel F， Howland HC. Properties of the feedback loops controlling eyegrowth and refractive state in the chicken. Vision Res，1991，31：717-734.
[8]	Maheshwaril R， Sukul RR， Gupta Y， et al. Accommodation： its relation to refractive errors， amblyopia and biometric parameters. Nepal J Ophthalmol，2011，36，146-150.
[9]	陈洁，吕帆，于旭东，等. 眼调节幅度与近视眼的关系研究. 中国实用眼科杂志，2004，12：1011-1013.
[10]	马可，刘陇黔. 青年人近视眼与各调节因素的关系. 眼视光学杂志，2006，8：85-87.
[11]	Abraham LM， Kuriakose T， Sivanandam V， et al. Correlation between ocular parameters and amplitude of accommodation.Indian J Ophthalmol，2010，58：483-485.
[12]	Aggarwala KR， Nowbotsing S， Kruger PB. Accommodation to monochromatic and white-light targets. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci，1995，36：2695-2705.
[13]	Switkes E， Bradley A， Schor C. Readily visible changes in color contrast are insufficient to stimulate accommodation. Vision Res，1990，30：1367-76.
[14]	Rucker FJ， Wallman J. Chick eyes compensate for chromatic sinulations of hyperopic and myopia defocus： evidence that the eye uses longitudinal chromatic aberration to guide eye-growth. Vision Res，2009，49：1775-1783.
[15]	朱晓伟，付东，蓝卫钟，等. 正视儿童视近条件下对显示终端不同颜色光线的调节反应.中华眼视光学与视觉科学杂志，2011，13：453-456.
[16]	Qian YS， Chu RY， He JC， et al. Incidence of myopia in high school students with and without red-green color vision deficiency. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci，2009，50：1598-1605.
[17]	Sreenivasan V， Irving EL， Bobier WR. Effect of near adds on the variability of accommodativ response in myopic children. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt，2011，31：145-154.

[1]

Chinese Optometric Association, Chinese Ophthalmological Society; Ophthalmology and Optometry Committee, Ophthalmologists Association, Chinese Doctor Association; et al. Expert Consensus on Multifocal Soft Contact Lens Fitting for Myopia Control (2023)[J]. Chinese Journal of Optometry Ophthalmology and Visual science, 2023, 25(8): 561-567.