Suppr超能文献

近距聚散测量的比较。

Comparisons of proximal vergence measures.

作者信息

Fogt Nick

机构信息

The Ohio State University College of Optometry.

出版信息

Vis Dev Rehabil. 2020 Sep;6(3):252-263.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Proximal vergence is defined as a vergence eye movement subtype driven by an "awareness of nearness". The purpose of this experiment was to compare values of proximal vergence calculated with and without measures of accommodation to assess the clinical utility of each measurement method.

METHODS

Thirteen participants between the ages of 22 and 37 (mean = 28.5 ± 4.5 years) were enrolled. The distance and near heterophoria were measured using the Modified Thorington technique. The near heterophoria was measured under three randomized viewing conditions (no lenses, +1.00D lenses, +2.50D lenses). Refractive error was measured with an autorefractor. Proximal vergence was calculated as the difference in calculated (far-near) and gradient (+1.00) stimulus AC/A ratios (stimulus AC/A differencing method), the difference in calculated and gradient response AC/A ratios (response AC/A differencing method), and the change in vergence from distance to near with the +2.50D lenses (uncorrected +2.50D method). This latter value was also corrected for any active accommodation with +2.50D lenses (corrected +2.50D method).

RESULTS

The mean proximal vergence values (Δ) were 7.82 ± 5.98 (stimulus AC/A differencing method), 8.29 ± 3.30 (response AC/A differencing method), 6.23 ± 3.52 (uncorrected +2.50D method), and 5.13 ± 2.98 (corrected +2.50D method). The only comparison that showed both a significant correlation (p<0.05) and a non-significant difference from the paired t-test (p>0.05) was that between the stimulus AC/A differencing method and the uncorrected +2.50D method.

CONCLUSIONS

When response accommodation was accounted for, differences occurred in the mean proximal values obtained with the various methods. The means of the methods most likely to be used clinically (stimulus AC/A differencing method and uncorrected +2.50D method) were similar, although some individuals demonstrated significant differences between these methods.

摘要

背景

近感知性集合被定义为由“对近处的感知”驱动的一种集合眼球运动亚型。本实验的目的是比较在有和没有调节测量的情况下计算出的近感知性集合值,以评估每种测量方法的临床实用性。

方法

招募了13名年龄在22至37岁之间(平均 = 28.5 ± 4.5岁)的参与者。使用改良的索林顿技术测量远距离和近距离隐斜。在三种随机观看条件下(无镜片、+1.00D镜片、+2.50D镜片)测量近距离隐斜。用自动验光仪测量屈光不正。近感知性集合的计算方法为:计算得出的(远 - 近)和梯度(+1.00)刺激AC/A比率之差(刺激AC/A差值法)、计算得出的和梯度反应AC/A比率之差(反应AC/A差值法),以及佩戴+2.50D镜片时从远距离到近距离的集合变化(未矫正的+2.50D法)。后一个值也针对佩戴+2.50D镜片时的任何主动调节进行了校正(矫正后的+2.50D法)。

结果

近感知性集合的平均差值(Δ)分别为7.82 ± 5.98(刺激AC/A差值法)、8.29 ± 3.30(反应AC/A差值法)、6.23 ± 3.52(未矫正的+2.50D法)和5.13 ± 2.98(矫正后的+2.50D法)。唯一显示出显著相关性(p<0.05)且配对t检验无显著差异(p>0.05)的比较是刺激AC/A差值法与未矫正的+2.50D法之间的比较。

结论

当考虑反应性调节时,用各种方法获得的平均近感知性集合值存在差异。临床上最可能使用的方法(刺激AC/A差值法和未矫正的+2.50D法)的平均值相似,尽管一些个体在这些方法之间表现出显著差异。

相似文献

3
Reliability of the response AC/A ratio determined using nearpoint autorefraction and simultaneous heterophoria measurement.
Clin Exp Optom. 1998 Sep-Oct;81(5):185-192. doi: 10.1111/j.1444-0938.1998.tb06733.x.
4
Proximal vergence and age.近距集合与年龄。
Optom Vis Sci. 1991 Mar;68(3):168-72. doi: 10.1097/00006324-199103000-00002.

本文引用的文献

1
A review of proximal inputs to the near response.对近反射的近端输入的综述。
Clin Exp Optom. 2016 Jan;99(1):30-8. doi: 10.1111/cxo.12301.
2
Understanding Bland Altman analysis.理解布兰德-奥特曼分析。
Biochem Med (Zagreb). 2015 Jun 5;25(2):141-51. doi: 10.11613/BM.2015.015. eCollection 2015.
6
A comparison of clinical methods of measuring accommodative convergence.
Am J Optom Arch Am Acad Optom. 1950 Aug;27(8):385-96.
7
The relationship of proximal convergence to fusional and accommodative convergence.
Am J Optom Arch Am Acad Optom. 1951 Jun;28(6):300-8. doi: 10.1097/00006324-195106000-00006.

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验