Accommodative amplitude using the minus lens at different near distances

Momeni‐Moghaddam, Hamed; Ng, Jason; Cesana, Bruno Mario; Yekta, Abbasali; Sedaghat, Mohammad Reza

doi:10.4103/ijo.ijo_545_16

Cited by 5 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 26 publications

(28 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The results of this study agree with the findings of Momeni-Maghaddam et al 11,12 who found that the AA measured at 33 cm was higher than that with the target at 40 cm, and the mean difference was 1.17 D on average. In this study, the mean difference between the AA measured using minuslens-to-blur method with the target at 40 cm and 33 cm was -0.70 ± 0.84 D. The minus lens technique is one of the subjective techniques for measuring the AA and like other subjective methods tends to overestimate the true AA, mainly due to depth of focus, target and pupil size and illumination.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 93%

“…Previous studies have tested the accuracy of the push-up-to-blur technique and found that illumination, target size, depth of focus, endpoint criteria, proximal cues and pupil size all affect these measurements. 4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14 Generally, the push-up-to-blur method overestimates the AA and can suggest that active accommodation is present when it is not. 4,5 The subjective push-up-to-blur technique overestimates the true AA of the eye due to an increase in proximally induced accommodation and the relative linear magnification of the target.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Agreement between distance and near minus-lens-to-blur amplitude of accommodation in pre-presbyopic subjects

Ndlovu

Mothapo

Kgatla

et al. 2019

African Vision and Eye Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Guidelines for predicting the amplitude of accommodation (AA) sometimes are based on measurements for the subjective push-up-to-blur method. However, the pushup-to-blur method often overestimates the accommodative response. Another method that is commonly used to measure AA is the minus-lens-to-blur technique. This method is routinely conducted at a viewing distance of 40 cm, with the addition of 2.50 D to correspond with the initial accommodative stimulus.Aim: Although the AA measured using the minus-lens-to-blur method can be performed with the target at 40 cm, this study investigated changing the viewing distance and then comparing the means for participants at 600 cm (6 m), 40 cm (0.4 m) and 33 cm (0.33 m). In this manner, the possibility of using the AA measured at 6 m to estimate AA at 40 cm or 33 cm could be explored. Setting:The study was conducted in the Optometry Department, University of Limpopo. Methods:The AA was measured using the minus-lens-to-blur method over the distance correction when the target was held at viewing distances of 6 m, 40 cm and 33 cm. The minus lens power used to stimulate accommodation was gradually increased in 0.25 D steps. All measurements were performed using a phoropter. Results:The mean AA was 8.46 ± 2.07 D for 6 m, 10.62 ± 2.05 D for 40 cm and 11.31 ± 2.07 D for 33 cm. The measured AA at 6 m was significantly lower than that with the target at 40 cm and 33 cm measurement, p < 0.01. The Bland-Altman plots showed that there was a weaker agreement between the measured AA with the target at 6 m and near; however, there was a better agreement when the target was at 40 cm or 33 cm. Conclusion:The findings of this study suggest that the results for AA measured using the minus-lens-to-blur method at 6 m are not comparable to the results with the target at 40 cm or 33 cm. Even though there was a positive correlation between 6 m and the near distances, the results were not interchangeable or useful to calculate AA at 40 cm and 33 cm. The difference between the AA measured with the target at 40 cm and 33 cm can vary on average by about 0.70 D.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 93%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Agreement between distance and near minus-lens-to-blur amplitude of accommodation in pre-presbyopic subjects

Ndlovu

Mothapo

Kgatla

et al. 2019

African Vision and Eye Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The push-up amplitude of accommodation has been known to be significantly higher than the minus-lens-to-blur amplitude of accommodation 5,26,30,32,35 and overestimates the amplitude of accommodation. 5,6,30,36 In the current study, the minuslens-to-blur amplitude of accommodation was measured with the target at 40 cm, as a study 36 found higher repeatability at this distance than at 33 cm.…”

Section: Article Informationmentioning

confidence: 67%

Normative Data for Parameters of Accommodation in African Schoolchildren

Moodley

Boadi-Kusi

2021

Optom Vis Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The reported interracial differences in normative data for parameters of accommodation call for investigating population-specific normative values. The study investigated and presents expected data for accommodative parameters among Ghanaian children. PURPOSE:This study aimed to determine expected values for parameters of accommodation among schoolchildren in the Central Region of Ghana.METHODS: This prospective cross-sectional study used a multistage cluster sampling approach. Normal participants were asymptomatic (Convergence Insufficiency Symptom Survey score ˂16), with unaided visual acuity or best-corrected visual acuity of 0.0 or better logMAR for each eye and having no ocular disease or no manifest strabismus. Normal participants underwent push-up and minus-lens-to-blur amplitude of accommodation tests, accuracy of accommodative response (using the monocular estimation method), and monocular and binocular accommodative facility testing.RESULTS: A total of 1261 normal participants within ages 11 to 17 years (mean, 14.75 ± 1.53 years) met the inclusion criteria. The mean normative data for the population include push-up amplitude of accommodation (14.04 ± 2.95 D), minus-lens-to-blur amplitude of accommodation (12.33 ± 2.55 D), and accuracy of accommodative response using the monocular estimation method (0.62 ± 0.22 D), monocular accommodative facility (9.80 ± 3.20 cycles per minute), and binocular accommodative facility (9.40 ± 3.30 cycles per minute). Agepredicted linear regression equations for the amplitude of accommodation are push-up amplitude of accommodation (16.74 − 0.18 Â age in years) and minus-lens-to-blur amplitude of accommodation (15.7 − 0.23 Â age in years). CONCLUSIONS:The study provides normative data for accommodative parameters that clinicians may use with Ghanaian populations of similar ages.

show abstract

“…For good repeatability, the measurements must be taken under the same conditions [ 27 ]. For example, our previous study [ 28 ] demonstrated large variation in measurements of vergence and fusional reserve on various weekdays and even during the day. If accommodative amplitude measurement is repeated with a 24 h difference, the repeatability coefficient is ±1.24 at a viewing distance of 33 cm, compared to ±0.99 at a viewing distance of 40 cm [ 29 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Application of a New Device for Vision Relaxation in Computer Users

Svede,

Semjonova,

Ganebnaya

et al. 2024

Vision

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study aims to explore the potential of a novel EYE ROLL device designed to facilitate guided vision relaxation exercises in an open space. A prospective study was performed on 89 participants who perform screenwork for at least four hours daily. All participants were randomly divided 11 into three groups: a Control group with no exercising, a Manual group undertook manual vision relax12 ation exercises, and an Eyeroll group engaged in EYE ROLL device-assisted vision relaxation exercises. Each participant underwent three evaluations (an initial baseline assessment, a 4-week follow-up, and an 8-week follow-up) with four assessment tools: a comprehensive vision examination, an in-depth questionnaire, saccadic eye movement recordings, and objective accommodation measurements. There was a statistically significant decrease (35% and above) in complaint scores at the 4-week follow-up in both training groups. Although statistically insignificant, complaints continued to decrease after an 8-week period. No significant changes were observed in clinical or objective accommodative parameters. Some variation of visual functions was observed in all groups due to repeated measures. Vision relaxation exercises combined with proper vision ergonomics and working habits can reduce asthenopic complaints. The EYE ROLL device presents a promising tool for integrating these exercises into the working environment.

show abstract

Accommodative amplitude using the minus lens at different near distances

Cited by 5 publications

References 26 publications

Agreement between distance and near minus-lens-to-blur amplitude of accommodation in pre-presbyopic subjects

Agreement between distance and near minus-lens-to-blur amplitude of accommodation in pre-presbyopic subjects

Normative Data for Parameters of Accommodation in African Schoolchildren

Application of a New Device for Vision Relaxation in Computer Users

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About