Cargando…

Developing dynamic defocus curve for evaluating dynamic vision accommodative function

BACKGROUND: To assess dynamic visual acuity (DVA) under different defocus statuses and explore the assessment of dynamic vision accommodation. METHODS: Twenty subjects (6 males and 14 females) aged 18 to 35 were recruited. Nonmydriatic subjective refraction (sphere and cylinder) and accommodative te...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wu, Tingyi, Wang, Yuexin, Wei, Shanshan, Guo, Yining, Li, Xuemin
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8898511/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35248018
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12886-022-02335-9
_version_ 1784663664031170560
author Wu, Tingyi
Wang, Yuexin
Wei, Shanshan
Guo, Yining
Li, Xuemin
author_facet Wu, Tingyi
Wang, Yuexin
Wei, Shanshan
Guo, Yining
Li, Xuemin
author_sort Wu, Tingyi
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: To assess dynamic visual acuity (DVA) under different defocus statuses and explore the assessment of dynamic vision accommodation. METHODS: Twenty subjects (6 males and 14 females) aged 18 to 35 were recruited. Nonmydriatic subjective refraction (sphere and cylinder) and accommodative tests including negative relative accommodation (NRA), positive relative accommodation (PRA), binocular cross cylinder (BCC) and accommodative facility using a flipper were performed. Binocular static visual acuity (SVA) and DVA at 40 degrees per second (dps) were measured under different defocus statuses (+1.5D to -4D in -0.5D steps) based on the refractive error fully corrected. Static and dynamic defocus curves were plotted. The area under the curve (AUC) and corrected dynamic vision accommodation (CDVAc) were calculated. RESULTS: The study showed that the dynamic defocus curve fitted the cubic curve properly (p<0.001). DVA was significantly worse than SVA at all defocused statuses (p<0.001), and the difference was more significant at greater defocus diopters. Single factor analysis indicated that CDVAc was significantly correlated with NRA-PRA (p=0.012) and AUC(dynamic) (p<0.001). Significant associations were observed between AUC(dynamic) and PRA (p=0.013) as well as NRA-PRA (p=0.021). Meanwhile, DVA was positively correlated with PRA at 0D, -1.0D, -1.5D, -2.5D and -3.0D (p<0.05) and with NRA-PRA at 0D, -1.0D, -1.5D, -2.0D and -2.5D (p<0.05). Multiple factor regression analysis indicated that CDVAc (0D ~ -3.5D) and SVA (+1.5D ~ +1.0D & -2.5D ~ -4.0D) were significant influential factors for defocused DVA (p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrated that DVA had a defocus curve similar to that of SVA. CDVAc was feasible for the assessment of dynamic vision accommodative function. The dynamic defocus curve test could efficiently be applied in the evaluation of dynamic visual performance under different defocus statuses.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8898511
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-88985112022-03-17 Developing dynamic defocus curve for evaluating dynamic vision accommodative function Wu, Tingyi Wang, Yuexin Wei, Shanshan Guo, Yining Li, Xuemin BMC Ophthalmol Research BACKGROUND: To assess dynamic visual acuity (DVA) under different defocus statuses and explore the assessment of dynamic vision accommodation. METHODS: Twenty subjects (6 males and 14 females) aged 18 to 35 were recruited. Nonmydriatic subjective refraction (sphere and cylinder) and accommodative tests including negative relative accommodation (NRA), positive relative accommodation (PRA), binocular cross cylinder (BCC) and accommodative facility using a flipper were performed. Binocular static visual acuity (SVA) and DVA at 40 degrees per second (dps) were measured under different defocus statuses (+1.5D to -4D in -0.5D steps) based on the refractive error fully corrected. Static and dynamic defocus curves were plotted. The area under the curve (AUC) and corrected dynamic vision accommodation (CDVAc) were calculated. RESULTS: The study showed that the dynamic defocus curve fitted the cubic curve properly (p<0.001). DVA was significantly worse than SVA at all defocused statuses (p<0.001), and the difference was more significant at greater defocus diopters. Single factor analysis indicated that CDVAc was significantly correlated with NRA-PRA (p=0.012) and AUC(dynamic) (p<0.001). Significant associations were observed between AUC(dynamic) and PRA (p=0.013) as well as NRA-PRA (p=0.021). Meanwhile, DVA was positively correlated with PRA at 0D, -1.0D, -1.5D, -2.5D and -3.0D (p<0.05) and with NRA-PRA at 0D, -1.0D, -1.5D, -2.0D and -2.5D (p<0.05). Multiple factor regression analysis indicated that CDVAc (0D ~ -3.5D) and SVA (+1.5D ~ +1.0D & -2.5D ~ -4.0D) were significant influential factors for defocused DVA (p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrated that DVA had a defocus curve similar to that of SVA. CDVAc was feasible for the assessment of dynamic vision accommodative function. The dynamic defocus curve test could efficiently be applied in the evaluation of dynamic visual performance under different defocus statuses. BioMed Central 2022-03-05 /pmc/articles/PMC8898511/ /pubmed/35248018 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12886-022-02335-9 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Wu, Tingyi
Wang, Yuexin
Wei, Shanshan
Guo, Yining
Li, Xuemin
Developing dynamic defocus curve for evaluating dynamic vision accommodative function
title Developing dynamic defocus curve for evaluating dynamic vision accommodative function
title_full Developing dynamic defocus curve for evaluating dynamic vision accommodative function
title_fullStr Developing dynamic defocus curve for evaluating dynamic vision accommodative function
title_full_unstemmed Developing dynamic defocus curve for evaluating dynamic vision accommodative function
title_short Developing dynamic defocus curve for evaluating dynamic vision accommodative function
title_sort developing dynamic defocus curve for evaluating dynamic vision accommodative function
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8898511/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35248018
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12886-022-02335-9
work_keys_str_mv AT wutingyi developingdynamicdefocuscurveforevaluatingdynamicvisionaccommodativefunction
AT wangyuexin developingdynamicdefocuscurveforevaluatingdynamicvisionaccommodativefunction
AT weishanshan developingdynamicdefocuscurveforevaluatingdynamicvisionaccommodativefunction
AT guoyining developingdynamicdefocuscurveforevaluatingdynamicvisionaccommodativefunction
AT lixuemin developingdynamicdefocuscurveforevaluatingdynamicvisionaccommodativefunction