Heather A Anderson, Sidney M Parks, Marjean T Kulp, G Lynn Mitchell
{"title":"通过单眼主观俯卧撑测试对儿童和青少年的适应能力不足进行分类,对单眼客观振幅的预测性较差。","authors":"Heather A Anderson, Sidney M Parks, Marjean T Kulp, G Lynn Mitchell","doi":"10.1111/opo.13419","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>To determine whether classification of accommodative insufficiency (AI) based on the subjective push-up test is indicative of reduced amplitude measured objectively.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Monocular subjective accommodative amplitude was measured in participants 7-24 years of age with the push-up test; a 0.9 mm letter was moved towards the eye until first sustained blur occurred. Monocular objective amplitude was measured with the same target and an autorefractor for demands from 2.5 to 30 D. The maximum response was termed the amplitude. Near point of convergence (NPC) was measured in a subset of participants. Participants were classified into groups using subjective amplitude: normal amplitude or AI (amplitude < ((15 - 0.25 × age) - 2)). Objective amplitude was plotted by age for each group and one-way ANCOVA used to evaluate differences while controlling for age. For NPC measures, a t-test compared the magnitude of the break between those with and without AI.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Fifty-five of 185 participants were classified as having AI. Objective amplitude decreased with age (0.20 D/year) and there was no significant difference in the age-adjusted mean amplitudes for the two groups (AI: 7.62 D, CI = 7.19, 8.04; Normal: 7.86 D, CI = 7.58, 8.15; p = 0.11). For the subset with NPC measures, participants classified as having AI had significantly more receded break values than those without AI (7.7 ± 5 vs. 3.7 ± 3 cm, p < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Factors other than accommodative ability may be contributing to lower subjective amplitude findings in individuals meeting the criterion for AI.</p>","PeriodicalId":19522,"journal":{"name":"Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Classification of accommodative insufficiency by monocular subjective push-up test is poorly predictive of monocular objective amplitudes in children and young adults.\",\"authors\":\"Heather A Anderson, Sidney M Parks, Marjean T Kulp, G Lynn Mitchell\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/opo.13419\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>To determine whether classification of accommodative insufficiency (AI) based on the subjective push-up test is indicative of reduced amplitude measured objectively.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Monocular subjective accommodative amplitude was measured in participants 7-24 years of age with the push-up test; a 0.9 mm letter was moved towards the eye until first sustained blur occurred. Monocular objective amplitude was measured with the same target and an autorefractor for demands from 2.5 to 30 D. The maximum response was termed the amplitude. Near point of convergence (NPC) was measured in a subset of participants. Participants were classified into groups using subjective amplitude: normal amplitude or AI (amplitude < ((15 - 0.25 × age) - 2)). Objective amplitude was plotted by age for each group and one-way ANCOVA used to evaluate differences while controlling for age. For NPC measures, a t-test compared the magnitude of the break between those with and without AI.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Fifty-five of 185 participants were classified as having AI. Objective amplitude decreased with age (0.20 D/year) and there was no significant difference in the age-adjusted mean amplitudes for the two groups (AI: 7.62 D, CI = 7.19, 8.04; Normal: 7.86 D, CI = 7.58, 8.15; p = 0.11). For the subset with NPC measures, participants classified as having AI had significantly more receded break values than those without AI (7.7 ± 5 vs. 3.7 ± 3 cm, p < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Factors other than accommodative ability may be contributing to lower subjective amplitude findings in individuals meeting the criterion for AI.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19522,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/opo.13419\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"OPHTHALMOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/opo.13419","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
引言目的:确定根据主观俯卧撑测试划分的容差不足(AI)是否反映了客观测量的振幅降低:方法:通过俯卧撑测试测量 7-24 岁参与者的单眼主观容纳振幅;将一个 0.9 毫米的字母向眼球移动,直到首次出现持续模糊。用同一目标和自动屈光仪测量单眼客观振幅,要求从 2.5 到 30 D。对一部分参与者进行了辐辏近点(NPC)测量。根据主观振幅将参与者分为两组:正常振幅组和 AI(振幅结果)组:185 名参与者中有 55 人被归类为 AI 患者。客观振幅随年龄增长而减小(0.20 D/年),两组经年龄调整后的平均振幅无显著差异(人工智能:7.62 D,CI = 7.19,8.04;正常:7.86 D,CI = 7.58,8.15;P = 0.11)。在进行 NPC 测量的子集中,被归类为 AI 的参与者的后退断点值明显高于没有 AI 的参与者(7.7 ± 5 vs. 3.7 ± 3 cm,p 结论:在进行 NPC 测量的子集中,被归类为 AI 的参与者的后退断点值明显高于没有 AI 的参与者:适应能力以外的因素可能会导致符合 AI 标准的个体主观振幅较低。
Classification of accommodative insufficiency by monocular subjective push-up test is poorly predictive of monocular objective amplitudes in children and young adults.
Introduction: To determine whether classification of accommodative insufficiency (AI) based on the subjective push-up test is indicative of reduced amplitude measured objectively.
Methods: Monocular subjective accommodative amplitude was measured in participants 7-24 years of age with the push-up test; a 0.9 mm letter was moved towards the eye until first sustained blur occurred. Monocular objective amplitude was measured with the same target and an autorefractor for demands from 2.5 to 30 D. The maximum response was termed the amplitude. Near point of convergence (NPC) was measured in a subset of participants. Participants were classified into groups using subjective amplitude: normal amplitude or AI (amplitude < ((15 - 0.25 × age) - 2)). Objective amplitude was plotted by age for each group and one-way ANCOVA used to evaluate differences while controlling for age. For NPC measures, a t-test compared the magnitude of the break between those with and without AI.
Results: Fifty-five of 185 participants were classified as having AI. Objective amplitude decreased with age (0.20 D/year) and there was no significant difference in the age-adjusted mean amplitudes for the two groups (AI: 7.62 D, CI = 7.19, 8.04; Normal: 7.86 D, CI = 7.58, 8.15; p = 0.11). For the subset with NPC measures, participants classified as having AI had significantly more receded break values than those without AI (7.7 ± 5 vs. 3.7 ± 3 cm, p < 0.001).
Conclusions: Factors other than accommodative ability may be contributing to lower subjective amplitude findings in individuals meeting the criterion for AI.
期刊介绍:
Ophthalmic & Physiological Optics, first published in 1925, is a leading international interdisciplinary journal that addresses basic and applied questions pertinent to contemporary research in vision science and optometry.
OPO publishes original research papers, technical notes, reviews and letters and will interest researchers, educators and clinicians concerned with the development, use and restoration of vision.