摘要
目的比较视觉显示终端上不同色光产生冲突的刺激对近视眼和正视眼调节反应及调节微波动的影响,探讨色光、调节与近视发生和发展之间可能的关系。方法采用非随机对照研究设计,纳入2020年1—5月于浙江大学医学院附属第一医院就诊的22~30岁受试者41人41眼,其中近视组22人22眼,正视组19人19眼,受试者色觉正常且无眼部器质性疾病。干预措施为不同色光屏幕,共有7种色光类型,分别是3种单色光(红、绿、蓝)、3种双色光(红+绿、红+蓝、绿+蓝)和1种混合光(白色:红+绿+蓝)。受试者持续注视33 cm处可视性视频终端上的黑色E视标20 s以上,随机变换屏幕背景颜色,用Grand Seiko WAM-5500开放视野自动验光仪每0.2 s自动检测1次,记录受试者调节反应,调节微波动以调节反应的标准差计算,比较各组受试眼不同色光条件下调节反应值和调节微波动。结果近视组与正视组调节反应值总体比较差异无统计学意义(F_(分组)=2.626,P=0.113),不同色光条件下调节反应值总体比较差异有统计学意义(F_(色光)=39.070,P<0.01)。各种色光对近视组和正视组的影响趋势相似,均为红光单色光调节反应值最大,其次为含红光的混合光,而蓝光单色光最小,差异均有统计学意义(均P<0.05)。正视组红、绿、蓝、红+蓝、红+绿、蓝+绿和白色光条件下调节微波动值分别为(0.142±0.033)、(0.128±0.038)、(0.131±0.043)、(0.139±0.039)、(0.127±0.034)、(0.131±0.043)和(0.139±0.042)D,近视组分别为(0.178±0.043)、(0.164±0.043)、(0.159±0.039)、(0.174±0.042)、(0.166±0.036)、(0.159±0.031)和(0.174±0.035)D,总体比较差异均有统计学意义(F_(分组)=12.146,P<0.01;F_(色光)=2.782,P<0.05),其中每种色光下近视组调节微波动值均高于正视组,差异均有统计学意义(均P<0.05);近视组红光调节微波动最大,显著大于蓝光,蓝绿混合光最小,差异均有统计学意义(均P<0.05);双色光的调节
Objective To explore the effects of conflicting stimuli generated by different chromatic lights on visual display terminal(VDT)on accommodative response and microfluctuation of myopes and emmetropes,and to investigate the possible relationship between chromatic light,accommodation and the development and progression of myopia.Methods A non-randomized controlled trial was conducted.Forty-one subjects aged 22 to 30 years old were enrolled,including 19 emmetropes in emmetropic group and 22 myopes in myopic group.The subjects had the normal color vision and no ocular organic diseases.The interventions were screens of different colors.There were 7 chromatic light conditions,including 3 monochromatic lights(red,green,blue),3 bichromatic lights(red+green,red+blue,green+blue)and 1 polychromatic light(white=red+green+blue).Subjects were asked to look at a black E target on a VDT at a distance of 33 cm for more than 20 seconds.The background color of the VDT was changed randomly in the 7 chromatic light conditions.The accommodative responses were recorded with the Grand Seiko WAM-5500 automatic infrared refractor every 0.2 seconds and the accommodative microfluctuation was calculated as the standard deviation of the accommodative response.Accommodative response and accommodative microfluctuation under different chromatic light conditions were compared.This study adhered to the Declaration of Helsinki.The study protocol was approved by the Ethics Committee of the First Affiliated Hospital,Zhejiang University School of Medicine(No.2019-1564).Written informed consent was obtained from each subject.Results No statistically significant difference was found in the accommodative response between the two groups(F group=2.626,P=0.113).There was a statistically significant difference under different chromatic light conditions between the two groups(F light=39.070,P<0.01).There were similar trends in the effects of various color lights in both groups,with the largest accommodative response under monochromatic red light,followed by th
作者
张黎悦
郭东煜
谢忱
杨倩婕
孙远
童剑萍
沈晔
Zhang Liyue;Guo Dongyu;Xie Chen;Yang Qianjie;Sun Yuan;Tong Jianping;Shen Ye(Department of Ophthalmology,the First Affiliated Hospital,Zhejiang University School of Medicine,Hangzhou 310003,China)
出处
《中华实验眼科杂志》
CAS
CSCD
北大核心
2023年第4期351-356,共6页
Chinese Journal Of Experimental Ophthalmology
基金
国家自然科学基金项目(8220040041)
国家卫生健康委员会(原国家卫生和计划生育委员会)科研基金项目(2018273457)
中国科学院战略性先导科技专项项目(XDA16040200)。
关键词
近视
正视
眼调节
色光
调节反应
调节微波动
Myopia
Emmetropia
Accommodation,ocular
Chromatic light
Accommodative response
Accommodative microfluctuation
