Thakur Swapnil, Verkicharla Pavan K
Myopia Research Lab, Prof. Brien Holden Eye Research Centre, Brien Holden Institute of Optometry and Vision Sciences, L V Prasad Eye Institute, Hyderabad, 500034, India.
Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 2021 Nov;41(6):1355-1362. doi: 10.1111/opo.12893. Epub 2021 Sep 27.
We aimed to test the accommodative lag and mechanical tension theories for myopia by assessing the influence of the lag of accommodation on axial elongation by using three different near targets that are known to influence the accommodative response differently.
Forty-two young adults were recruited for the study. Axial length was measured using a non-contact biometer, before and immediately after a 15 minute visual task, with one of the three near targets placed 20 cm from the eye: reading text from a paper, reading text from a smartphone and watching a video on a smartphone. The accommodative response was determined using an open-field autorefractor while the participants viewed the near target monocularly.
Lag of accommodation was significantly different for the three tasks: watching a video (mean ± standard error of the mean [SEM] 0.92 ± 0.10 D); reading text on the smartphone (0.59 ± 0.08 D); and reading text on paper (0.24 ± 0.09 D). There was a significant (p < 0.05) increase in axial length after reading text from a paper (10.5 ± 1.9 µm after 15-min) and reading text from a smartphone (5.2 ± 2.7 µm), but not after watching a video on a smartphone (-0.5 ± 1.7 µm, p = 0.47). Vitreous chamber depth increased significantly more with the reading tasks compared with watching a video (reading text from a paper and smartphone: 33.9 ± 4 µm and 31.7 ± 4 µm vs. watching a video on a smartphone: 14.6 ± 5 µm, p = 0.001).
Greater changes in axial length associated with the low lag of accommodation failed to support the theory that lag of accommodation during visual tasks could be the trigger for axial elongation. Reading on paper and smartphone at the closest reading distance may stimulate high accommodative demand and axial elongation as a consequence, possibly due to increased "ciliary muscle tension" during accommodation.
我们旨在通过使用三种已知对调节反应有不同影响的近目标,评估调节滞后对眼轴伸长的影响,以检验近视的调节滞后理论和机械张力理论。
招募42名年轻成年人参与本研究。在一项15分钟视觉任务之前和之后立即使用非接触式生物测量仪测量眼轴长度,三种近目标之一放置在距眼睛20厘米处:阅读纸质文本、阅读智能手机上的文本以及观看智能手机上的视频。当参与者单眼观看近目标时,使用开放式自动验光仪确定调节反应。
三种任务的调节滞后有显著差异:观看视频(平均值±平均标准误差[SEM]0.92±0.10D);阅读智能手机上的文本(0.59±0.08D);以及阅读纸质文本(0.24±0.09D)。阅读纸质文本(15分钟后为10.5±1.9μm)和阅读智能手机上的文本(5.2±2.7μm)后眼轴长度有显著(p<0.05)增加,但观看智能手机上的视频后没有(-0.5±1.7μm,p=0.47)。与观看视频相比,阅读任务使玻璃体腔深度增加更为显著(阅读纸质文本和智能手机文本:分别为33.9±4μm和31.7±4μm,而观看智能手机上的视频为14.6±5μm,p=0.001)。
与低调节滞后相关的更大眼轴长度变化未能支持视觉任务期间的调节滞后可能是眼轴伸长触发因素的理论。在最接近的阅读距离阅读纸质文本和智能手机可能会刺激高调节需求并导致眼轴伸长,这可能是由于调节期间“睫状肌张力”增加所致。