Comparison of three monocular methods for measuring accommodative stimulus-response curves

被引:14
作者
Chen, Yunyun [1 ,2 ]
Jin, Wanqing [1 ,2 ]
Zheng, Zhili [1 ]
Zhang, Chuanchuan [1 ,2 ]
Lin, Huiling [1 ,2 ]
Drobe, Bjorn [2 ,3 ]
Bao, Jinhua [1 ,2 ]
Chen, Hao [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Wenzhou Med Univ, Sch Ophthalmol & Optometry, Wenzhou, Zhejiang, Peoples R China
[2] WMU Essilor Int Res Ctr, WEIRC, Wenzhou, Zhejiang, Peoples R China
[3] Essilor Inc Corp, R&D Opt Asia, Wenzhou, Peoples R China
关键词
accommodation; accommodative stimulus-response curve; objective accommodative amplitude; repeatability; slope; PROXIMALLY INDUCED ACCOMMODATION; REFRACTIVE ERROR; ADULT MYOPES; AMPLITUDE; SIZE; AGE; RELIABILITY; DISTANCE; CONTRAST; BLUR;
D O I
10.1111/cxo.12469
中图分类号
R77 [眼科学];
学科分类号
100212 ;
摘要
Purpose: The aim was to evaluate the repeatability of dynamic measurement of the accommodative stimulus-response curve (ASRC) at three different dioptric speeds using a modified instrument and its agreement with two other methods. Methods: Twenty-nine adults (23.52.0years) were enrolled in the study. ASRC was measured monocularly using three methods: dynamic and static measurement using a motorised Badal system mounted on an open-field auto-refractor (WAM-5500, Grand Seiko Co., Ltd, Japan) and the minus lens technique. Dynamic measurements were conducted at three dioptric stimulus speeds to simulate continuous stimuli for ASRC (0.25, 0.40 and 0.55 D/s), with three repetitions for each speed. All three types of ASRCs were fitted with third-degree polynomial equations. The slope and objective accommodative amplitude of the ASRC were analysed. Results: The repeatability of objective accommodative amplitude worsened as the speed of the stimuli increased. The repeatability of the slope was best at a speed of 0.40 D/s and worst at 0.55 D/s. The measurement method significantly influenced the objective accommodative amplitude values and slope (both, p<0.001). The minus lens technique yielded the highest amplitude of accommodation (6.21 +/- 0.84 D) and steepest slope (1.11 +/- 0.14), followed by the static Badal method (5.60 +/- 0.83 D and 0.89 +/- 0.09 D). The objective accommodative amplitude decreased with increasing speed during dynamic measurements. There was no difference between the slopes at 0.25 D and 0.40 D/s (p>0.05) and the slope was lowest at 0.55 D/s. Conclusion: The accommodative stimulus-response curve values are method-dependent and the significant differences between three methods used to determine the ASRC based on slope and accommodative amplitude indicate that these methods are non-interchangeable. Using dynamic measurements, accommodative behaviour varies with the speed of dioptric-change of the stimulus. A speed of 0.40 D/s appears to be the best compromise in terms of time, results and repeatability for dynamic ASRC measurement.
引用
收藏
页码:155 / 161
页数:7
相关论文
共 43 条
  • [1] Abbott ML, 1998, OPHTHAL PHYSL OPT, V18, P13, DOI 10.1016/S0275-5408(97)00072-0
  • [2] A comparison of the reliability of dynamic retinoscopy and subjective measurements of amplitude of accommodation
    Alvarez Leon, Alejandro
    Milena Medrano, Sandra
    Rosenfield, Mark
    [J]. OPHTHALMIC AND PHYSIOLOGICAL OPTICS, 2012, 32 (02) : 133 - 141
  • [3] Minus-lens-stimulated accommodative amplitude decreases sigmoidally with age: A study of objectively measured accommodative amplitudes from age 3
    Anderson, Heather A.
    Hentz, Gloria
    Glasser, Adrian
    Stuebing, Karla K.
    Manny, Ruth E.
    [J]. INVESTIGATIVE OPHTHALMOLOGY & VISUAL SCIENCE, 2008, 49 (07) : 2919 - 2926
  • [4] Minus Lens Stimulated Accommodative Lag as a Function of Age
    Anderson, Heather A.
    Glasser, Adrian
    Stuebing, Karla K.
    Manny, Ruth E.
    [J]. OPTOMETRY AND VISION SCIENCE, 2009, 86 (06) : 685 - 694
  • [5] Repeatability intraexaminer and agreement in amplitude of accommodation measurements
    Antona, B.
    Barra, F.
    Barrio, A.
    Gonzalez, E.
    Sanchez, I.
    [J]. GRAEFES ARCHIVE FOR CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL OPHTHALMOLOGY, 2009, 247 (01) : 121 - 127
  • [6] CRITICAL SUBJECTIVE MEASUREMENT OF AMPLITUDE OF ACCOMMODATION
    ATCHISON, DA
    CAPPER, EJ
    MCCABE, KL
    [J]. OPTOMETRY AND VISION SCIENCE, 1994, 71 (11) : 699 - 706
  • [7] Bland JM, 1996, BRIT MED J, V313, P744
  • [8] DYNAMICS OF ACCOMODATION RESPONSES OF THE HUMAN EYE
    CAMPBELL, FW
    WESTHEIMER, G
    [J]. JOURNAL OF PHYSIOLOGY-LONDON, 1960, 151 (02): : 285 - 295
  • [9] SINGLE FIGURE INDEXES FOR THE STEADY-STATE ACCOMMODATIVE RESPONSE
    CHAUHAN, K
    CHARMAN, WN
    [J]. OPHTHALMIC AND PHYSIOLOGICAL OPTICS, 1995, 15 (03) : 217 - 221
  • [10] ACCOMMODATIVE STIMULUS-RESPONSE FUNCTION IN HUMAN AMBLYOPIA
    CIUFFREDA, KJ
    HOKODA, SC
    HUNG, GK
    SEMMLOW, JL
    [J]. DOCUMENTA OPHTHALMOLOGICA, 1984, 56 (04) : 303 - 326