Journal of optometry · 2018
Effect of phenylephrine on static and dynamic accommodation.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Del Águila-Carrasco Antonio J, Lara Francisco, Bernal-Molina Paula, Riquelme-Nicolás Resurrección, Marín-Franch Iván, Esteve-Taboada José J, Montés-Micó Robert, Kruger Philip B, López-Gil Norberto
Аннотация
PURPOSE: We tested the hypothesis that changes in accommodation after instillation of Phenylephrine Hydrochloride (PHCl) observed in some studies could be caused by changes in optics.
METHODS: We performed two experiments to test the effects of PHCl on static and on dynamic accommodation in 8 and 6 subjects, respectively. Objective wavefront measurements were recorded of the static accommodation response to a stimulus at different distances or dynamic accommodation response to a sinusoidally moving stimulus (between 1 and 3 D of accommodative demand at 0.2Hz). The responses were characterized using two methods: one that takes into account the mydriatic optical effects on the accommodation produced by higher-order aberrations of the eye and another that takes into account only power changes paraxially due to the action of the ciliary muscle and regardless of the pupil size.
RESULTS: When mydriatic optical effects were taken into account, differences in responses before and after PHCl instillation were 0.51±0.53 D, and 0.12±0.15, for static and dynamic accommodation, respectively, and were statistically significant (p<0.039). When mydriatic optical effects were not taken into account, the differences in responses before and after PHCl instillation were -0.20±0.51 D, and -0.05±0.14, for static and dynamic accommodation, respectively, and were not statistically significant (p>0.313).
CONCLUSIONS: The mydriatic effect of the PHCl causes optical changes in the eye that can reduce the objective and subjective measurement of accommodation.
METHODS: We performed two experiments to test the effects of PHCl on static and on dynamic accommodation in 8 and 6 subjects, respectively. Objective wavefront measurements were recorded of the static accommodation response to a stimulus at different distances or dynamic accommodation response to a sinusoidally moving stimulus (between 1 and 3 D of accommodative demand at 0.2Hz). The responses were characterized using two methods: one that takes into account the mydriatic optical effects on the accommodation produced by higher-order aberrations of the eye and another that takes into account only power changes paraxially due to the action of the ciliary muscle and regardless of the pupil size.
RESULTS: When mydriatic optical effects were taken into account, differences in responses before and after PHCl instillation were 0.51±0.53 D, and 0.12±0.15, for static and dynamic accommodation, respectively, and were statistically significant (p<0.039). When mydriatic optical effects were not taken into account, the differences in responses before and after PHCl instillation were -0.20±0.51 D, and -0.05±0.14, for static and dynamic accommodation, respectively, and were not statistically significant (p>0.313).
CONCLUSIONS: The mydriatic effect of the PHCl causes optical changes in the eye that can reduce the objective and subjective measurement of accommodation.