Optometry and vision science : official publication of the American Academy of Optometry · 2001
Variations in accommodation and convergence responses in a minimally controlled photorefractive setting.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Horwood A M, Turner J E, Houston S M, Riddell P M
Аннотация
PURPOSE: A remote haploscopic photorefractor, designed for assessment of accommodation and convergence in infants and clinical groups, was used to determine heterophoria accommodative convergence/accommodation (AC/A) ratios in normal naïve adults. These were compared with conventional clinical measures.
METHODS: Twenty-one naïve subjects were used to compare occluded and unoccluded prism cover test responses with the remote haploscopic photorefractor using a text and picture target.
RESULTS: Although luminance was generally low for both targets, binocular vergences were appropriate for target demand in both studies. Binocular accommodation showed greater lag for the highest target accommodative demand and the less demanding target. Occlusion not only reduced vergence response, but also frequently caused a marked reduction in accommodation, especially to the picture target. Normal mean AC/A values were found, but with wide variations between individual subjects.
CONCLUSIONS: Although mean accommodation, vergence, and AC/A values were comparable with published data, we suggest that in these conditions using naïve subjects, accommodation is frequently inaccurate, especially on occlusion, without concomitant loss of vergence, at least at low light levels. Accommodative convergence may play a less important part in, and other cues contribute more to, the near reflex than has been previously suggested.
METHODS: Twenty-one naïve subjects were used to compare occluded and unoccluded prism cover test responses with the remote haploscopic photorefractor using a text and picture target.
RESULTS: Although luminance was generally low for both targets, binocular vergences were appropriate for target demand in both studies. Binocular accommodation showed greater lag for the highest target accommodative demand and the less demanding target. Occlusion not only reduced vergence response, but also frequently caused a marked reduction in accommodation, especially to the picture target. Normal mean AC/A values were found, but with wide variations between individual subjects.
CONCLUSIONS: Although mean accommodation, vergence, and AC/A values were comparable with published data, we suggest that in these conditions using naïve subjects, accommodation is frequently inaccurate, especially on occlusion, without concomitant loss of vergence, at least at low light levels. Accommodative convergence may play a less important part in, and other cues contribute more to, the near reflex than has been previously suggested.