Chun Tang Huang1, Tsukasa Satou1,2, Takahiro Niida1,2. 1. Department of Orthoptics and Visual Sciences, Master Program in Health Sciences, Graduate School of Health and Welfare Sciences, International University of Health and Welfare Graduate School , Tochigi, Japan. 2. Department of Orthoptics and Visual Sciences, School of Health Sciences, International University of Health and Welfare , Tochigi, Japan.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate the differences in accommodative gain in response to different accommodative stimuli and determine the effects of pupil size, binocular viewing, and inherent eye refraction on accommodative gain. METHODS: This study enrolled 47 healthy young adults (emmetropia: 21 eyes, myopia: 26 eyes). Refractive value and pupil size during accommodative stimulus were measured using an open-viewing type auto-refractor (Grand Seiko WAM-5500). The subject was continuously presented with six stimuli (0D, 1D, 2D, 3D, 4D, and 5D) in front of the eye. Measurements were performed under three conditions. Condition 1: Monocular status with complete occlusion of the non-viewing eye; Condition 2: Monocular status with occlusion of the non-viewing eye by translucent occluder; Condition 3: Binocular status. RESULTS: In the emmetropia group, there was no significant difference in accommodative gain between conditions 1 and 2 (p > .05), but conditions 2 and 3 were significantly different (p < .05). In the myopia group, accommodative gain was significantly different between conditions 1 and 2 with stimuli 3D, 4D, and 5D (p < .05), but conditions 2 and 3 were not significantly different (p > .05). CONCLUSIONS: The effects of pupil size and binocular viewing on accommodative gain differed between emmetropia and myopia.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the differences in accommodative gain in response to different accommodative stimuli and determine the effects of pupil size, binocular viewing, and inherent eye refraction on accommodative gain. METHODS: This study enrolled 47 healthy young adults (emmetropia: 21 eyes, myopia: 26 eyes). Refractive value and pupil size during accommodative stimulus were measured using an open-viewing type auto-refractor (Grand Seiko WAM-5500). The subject was continuously presented with six stimuli (0D, 1D, 2D, 3D, 4D, and 5D) in front of the eye. Measurements were performed under three conditions. Condition 1: Monocular status with complete occlusion of the non-viewing eye; Condition 2: Monocular status with occlusion of the non-viewing eye by translucent occluder; Condition 3: Binocular status. RESULTS: In the emmetropia group, there was no significant difference in accommodative gain between conditions 1 and 2 (p > .05), but conditions 2 and 3 were significantly different (p < .05). In the myopia group, accommodative gain was significantly different between conditions 1 and 2 with stimuli 3D, 4D, and 5D (p < .05), but conditions 2 and 3 were not significantly different (p > .05). CONCLUSIONS: The effects of pupil size and binocular viewing on accommodative gain differed between emmetropia and myopia.