Departamento Química y Bioquímica. Facultad de Farmacia, Universidad San Pablo-CEU, CEU Universities, Urbanización Montepríncipe, 28660, Boadilla del Monte, Spain.
Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Madrid, Spain.
Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2022 Dec;260(12):3985-3992. doi: 10.1007/s00417-022-05772-w. Epub 2022 Jul 29.
To characterize accommodative function in secondary school children in year 9 and year 13 and assess the possible relationship between daily working conditions (number of near work hours and distances) and accommodation variables related to accommodative excess.
This was a prospective study. Participants were 43 subjects who were first examined in year 9 and then again when they were in year 13. The accommodation variables measured in each session were as follows: accommodation amplitude (AA), accommodative response (AR), monocular and binocular accommodation flexibility (MAF and BAF), negative relative accommodation (NRA), and positive relative accommodation (PRA). Other data recorded were the number of hours spent working at near vision tasks and the distances used for these tasks. Participants were classified as those with accommodation variables within the normal range (NA) and those with variables suggesting accommodative excess (AE).
Several accommodative function variables were below normative values in both year 9 and year 13. The number of subjects classified as having AE went from 27.9% in year 9 to 58.1% in year 13 according to AR (p < 0.005) and from 23.3 to 46.5% according to MAF (p = 0.024). More near work was reported in year 13 (44.6 h/week) than year 9 (32.7 h/week) (p < 0.001). It emerged that subjects in year 13 spent more hours working at near if they had AE than if they were assigned to the NA group. No differences were detected in near work distances used by subjects in the NA and AE groups in both years.
In both school years, values outside the norm were detected in several accommodative function measures. Also, devoting more hours to near work was linked to a greater extent of accommodative excess. We would therefore recommend regular accommodative function assessment in secondary school children.
描述 9 年级和 13 年级中学生的调节功能，并评估日常工作条件（近距工作小时数和距离）与调节过度相关的调节变量之间的可能关系。
这是一项前瞻性研究。共有 43 名参与者，他们首先在 9 年级接受检查，然后在 13 年级再次接受检查。在每次检查中测量的调节变量如下：调节幅度（AA）、调节反应（AR）、单眼和双眼调节灵活性（MAF 和 BAF）、负相对调节（NRA）和正相对调节（PRA）。记录的其他数据包括用于近距工作任务的小时数和这些任务使用的距离。参与者分为调节变量在正常范围内（NA）的组和调节变量显示调节过度（AE）的组。
在 9 年级和 13 年级，几个调节功能变量均低于正常值。根据 AR（p<0.005），AE 人数从 9 年级的 27.9%增加到 13 年级的 58.1%，根据 MAF（p=0.024）从 23.3%增加到 46.5%。与 9 年级（32.7 小时/周）相比，13 年级报告的近距工作时间更多（44.6 小时/周）（p<0.001）。结果显示，AE 组的学生比 NA 组的学生在 13 年级时花费更多的时间在近距工作上。在 9 年级和 13 年级，NA 组和 AE 组的学生使用的近距工作距离没有差异。
在这两个学年中，都检测到了几个调节功能测量值超出正常值的情况。此外，更多地从事近距工作与更大程度的调节过度有关。因此，我们建议对中学生定期进行调节功能评估。
