Literature DB >> 7885674

Critical subjective measurement of amplitude of accommodation.

D A Atchison1, E J Capper, K L McCabe.   

Abstract

The use of fixed print size to measure amplitude of accommodation by the push-up method will result in a range of angular sizes of the print at the nearpoint for patients with different amplitudes. We investigated the effect of this on measured amplitude of accommodation in 60 subjects aged 25 to 45 years. We designed a near-vision chart, based on the Bailey-Lovie near-vision charts, but for which the letter sizes on adjacent lines are varied so that the difference between the inverse of letter sizes is constant (dioptric scale) rather than the geometric ratio between letters on adjacent lines being constant (logarithmic scale). Using this new chart, we compared the amplitudes obtained using N5 print (N5 Blur method) and with two critical methods for which the print of interest was always close to threshold acuity. This was achieved by having patients' attention drawn to a smaller line of letters every time the chart was moved closer in half-diopter steps. The N5 Blur method gave considerably higher amplitude measures than the two critical methods, but the mean differences decreased markedly as age increased: 1.8 to 2.2 D for a 25- to 29-year-old group to 0.7 to 0.8 D for a 40- to 45-year-old group. We believe that the use of fixed size print for measuring amplitude of accommodation by the push-up method gives overestimations that are more marked the higher the amplitude. This occurs because smaller measuring distances that accompany the higher amplitudes will increase angular size and consequently depth-of-focus (in dioptric terms).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1994        PMID: 7885674     DOI: 10.1097/00006324-199411000-00005

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Optom Vis Sci        ISSN: 1040-5488            Impact factor:   1.973


  14 in total

1.  Repeatability intraexaminer and agreement in amplitude of accommodation measurements.

Authors:  B Antona; F Barra; A Barrio; E Gonzalez; I Sanchez
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2008-09-13       Impact factor: 3.117

2.  Subjective versus objective accommodative amplitude: preschool to presbyopia.

Authors:  Heather A Anderson; Karla K Stuebing
Journal:  Optom Vis Sci       Date:  2014-11       Impact factor: 1.973

3.  Comparison of objective accommodation in phakic and pseudophakic eyes between age groups.

Authors:  Byunghoon Chung; Seonghee Choi; Yong Woo Ji; Eung Kweon Kim; Kyoung Yul Seo; Tae-Im Kim
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2019-01-30       Impact factor: 3.117

4.  Trapezius muscle activity increases during near work activity regardless of accommodation/vergence demand level.

Authors:  H O Richter; C Zetterberg; M Forsman
Journal:  Eur J Appl Physiol       Date:  2015-02-20       Impact factor: 3.078

5.  Cycloplegic Refraction in Hyperopic Children: Effectiveness of a 0.5% Tropicamide and 0.5% Phenylephrine Addition to 1% Cyclopentolate Regimen.

Authors:  Seul Gi Yoo; Myung Jin Cho; Ungsoo Samuel Kim; Seung Hee Baek
Journal:  Korean J Ophthalmol       Date:  2017-04-24

6.  Comparison of three monocular methods for measuring accommodative stimulus-response curves.

Authors:  Yunyun Chen; Wanqing Jin; Zhili Zheng; Chuanchuan Zhang; Huiling Lin; Björn Drobe; Jinhua Bao; Hao Chen
Journal:  Clin Exp Optom       Date:  2016-11-03       Impact factor: 2.742

7.  Factors Influencing Pseudo-Accommodation-The Difference between Subjectively Reported Range of Clear Focus and Objectively Measured Accommodation Range.

Authors:  Sandeep K Dhallu; Amy L Sheppard; Tom Drew; Toshifumi Mihashi; Juan F Zapata-Díaz; Hema Radhakrishnan; D Robert Iskander; James S Wolffsohn
Journal:  Vision (Basel)       Date:  2019-06-28

8.  Feasibility of optical quality analysis system for the objective assessment of accommodation insufficiency: a phase 1 study.

Authors:  Esther López-Artero; Nuria Garzón; Manuel Rodríguez-Vallejo; María García-Montero
Journal:  J Optom       Date:  2020-08-12

9.  Comparing measurement techniques of accommodative amplitudes.

Authors:  Hamed Momeni-Moghaddam; James Kundart; Farshad Askarizadeh
Journal:  Indian J Ophthalmol       Date:  2014-06       Impact factor: 1.848

10.  Clinical test responses to different orthoptic exercise regimes in typical young adults.

Authors:  Anna Horwood; Sonia Toor
Journal:  Ophthalmic Physiol Opt       Date:  2014-01-29       Impact factor: 3.117

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.