Jiang Feng, Chen Zheyi, Bi Hua, Ekure Edgar, Su Binbin, Wu Haoran, Huang Yifei, Zhang Bin, Jiang Jun
Medical School of Chinese PLA, Beijing, China; Department of Ophthalmology, Jinling Hospital, Nanjing, China.
Eye Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, Wenzhou, China.
PLoS One. 2015 Aug 21;10(8):e0136222. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0136222. eCollection 2015.
To investigate the association between ocular sensory dominance and interocular refractive error difference (IRED).
A total of 219 subjects were recruited. The refractive errors were determined by objective refraction with a fixation target located 6 meters away. 176 subjects were myopic, with 83 being anisometropic (IRED ≥ 0.75 D). 43 subjects were hyperopic, with 22 being anisometropic. Sensory dominance was measured with a continuous flashing technique with the tested eye viewing a Gabor increasing in contrast and the fellow eye viewing a Mondrian noise decreasing in contrast. The log ratio of Mondrian to Gabor's contrasts was recorded when a subject just detected the tilting direction of the Gabor during each trial. T-test was used to compare the 50 values collected from each eye, and the t-value was used as a subject's ocular dominance index (ODI) to quantify the degree of ocular dominance. A subject with ODI ≥ 2 (p < 0.05) had clear dominance and the eye with larger mean ratio was the dominant one. Otherwise, a subject had an unclear dominance.
The anisometropic subjects had stronger ocular dominance in comparison to non-anisometropic subjects (rank-sum test, p < 0.01 for both myopic and hyperopic subjects). In anisometropic subjects with clear dominance, the amplitude of the anisometropia was correlated with ODI values (R = 0.42, p < 0.01 in myopic anisometropic subjects; R = 0.62, p < 0.01 in hyperopic anisometropic subjects). Moreover, the dominant eyes were more myopic in myopic anisometropic subjects (sign-test, p < 0.05) and less hyperopic in hyperopic anisometropic subjects (sign-test, p < 0.05).
The degree of ocular sensory dominance is associated with interocular refractive error difference.
研究眼感觉优势与双眼屈光不正差异(IRED)之间的关联。
共招募了219名受试者。使用位于6米远处的注视目标通过客观验光来确定屈光不正。176名受试者为近视,其中83名是屈光参差性近视(IRED≥0.75 D)。43名受试者为远视,其中22名是屈光参差性远视。采用连续闪烁技术测量感觉优势,测试眼注视对比度增加的Gabor图形,对侧眼注视对比度降低的蒙德里安噪声图形。在每次试验中,当受试者刚检测到Gabor图形的倾斜方向时,记录蒙德里安图形与Gabor图形对比度的对数比。使用t检验比较从每只眼睛收集的50个值,并将t值用作受试者的眼优势指数(ODI)来量化眼优势程度。ODI≥2(p<0.05)的受试者具有明确的优势,平均比值较大的眼为优势眼。否则,受试者的优势不明确。
与非屈光参差性受试者相比,屈光参差性受试者具有更强的眼优势(秩和检验,近视和远视受试者均p<0.01)。在具有明确优势的屈光参差性受试者中,屈光参差幅度与ODI值相关(近视屈光参差性受试者中R = 0.42,p<0.01;远视屈光参差性受试者中R = 0.62,p<0.01)。此外,在近视屈光参差性受试者中,优势眼更近视(符号检验,p<0.05),在远视屈光参差性受试者中,优势眼远视程度更低(符号检验,p<0.05)。
眼感觉优势程度与双眼屈光不正差异有关。