应用调节检查仪分析观看3D视频诱导的视疲劳

发布时间：2018-12-16 03:47

【摘要】：目的应用调节检查仪AA-1(Accommodation Analyzer-1,AA-1)分析观看三维(three dimension,3D)立体视频诱导的人眼视疲劳。设计实验研究。研究对象20~30岁健康受试者48例,屈光状态为正视或轻中度近视(球镜-5.0 D,柱镜在-1.0~+1.0 D之间),矫正视力均为1.0。方法每位受试者分别观看两个不同立体显示技术的立体电视40分钟,A屏为硬屏偏振光4K立体电视;B屏为快门眼镜式4K立体电视。在观看前后应用综合验光仪检测调节功能,应用调节分析仪(AA-1)测试受试者的调节反应量及调节微波动高频(microfluctuation high frequency,HFC)值,填写主观问卷(包括眼干、眼痛、视物模糊或头晕头痛等症状,评分为1~10分,分值越高疲劳程度越重)。分析受试者在观看屏幕前后以及比较观看两个屏幕之间主观评分、各项调节指标的差异。主要指标调节幅度、正负相对调节(PRA、NRA)、调节性辐辏/调节比(AC/A),HFC值以及观看3D视频后的主观评分。结果受试者在观看B屏前右眼调节幅度为(13.22±3.39)D,观看后为(13.92±4.13)D(P=0.035);左眼观看前为(13.93±3.99)D,观看后为(15.28±6.13)D(P=0.018)。而观看A屏后,仅左眼调节幅度较观看前变化显著(P=0.010)。观看A屏前后右眼HFC值分别为(60.10±10.96)、(60.26±10.74)(P=0.450),左眼观看前后HFC值分别为(61.22±9.00)D、(61.84±9.67)D(P=0.001)。而观看B屏后,右眼和左眼的HFC值[(58.45±10.63)D和(59.59±13.09)D]均较观看前[(58.93±11.20)D和(60.87±11.31)D]下降(P均=0.000)。主观问卷中,观看A屏和B屏的总评分分别为(3.13+2.35)分和(3.70+2.27)分(P=0.450)。结论观看立体视频会造成一定程度的视疲劳。通过AA-1仪检测HFC值及调节反应量变化,能够客观反映调节紧张及视疲劳的程度。
[Abstract]:Objective to analyze the visual fatigue induced by three-dimensional (three dimension,3D) stereoscopic video using AA-1 (Accommodation Analyzer-1,AA-1). Design experimental research. Participants 48 healthy subjects aged 20 to 30 years were enrolled in the study. The refractive state was emmetropia or mild to moderate myopia (spherical mirror -5.0 D, column lens ranging from -1.0 D to 1.0 D), and the corrected visual acuity was 1.0. Methods each subject watched two stereoscopic TV with different stereoscopic display technology for 40 minutes, A screen was hard screen polarized 4K stereoscopic TV, B screen was shutter glasses 4K stereoscopic TV. The adjustment function was detected by comprehensive optometry before and after viewing, the adjustment response and the high frequency (microfluctuation high frequency,HFC of microwave were measured by AA-1, and the subjective questionnaire (including dry eye, eye pain) was filled out. Symptoms such as blurred vision or dizziness and headache were scored from 1 to 10, the higher the score was, the more severe the fatigue. Objective: to analyze the differences of subjective scores and adjustment indexes between the two screens before and after viewing the screen. Main outcome measures Adjustment amplitude, positive and negative relative adjustment (PRA,NRA), adjustable convergence / accommodation ratio (AC/A), HFC) and subjective score after viewing 3D video. Results the adjusting amplitude of right eye was (13.22 卤3.39) D before viewing B screen, and (13.92 卤4.13) D () P ~ (0.035) after viewing. The left eye was (13.93 卤3.99) D before viewing and (15.28 卤6.13) D () P 0.018 after watching. However, after viewing screen A, only the amplitude of left eye adjustment was significantly different from that before viewing (P0. 010). The HFC values of right eye and left eye were (60.10 卤10.96), (, 60.26 卤10.74) and (61.22 卤9.00) D, (, 61.84 卤9.67) D (P0.001), respectively. After viewing B screen, the HFC values of right eye and left eye [(58.45 卤10.63) D and (59.59 卤13.09) D] were significantly lower than those before viewing [(58.93 卤11.20) D and (60.87 卤11.31) D] (P = 0.000). In subjective questionnaire, the total scores of viewing A screen and B screen were (3.132.35) and (3.70 2.27) (P0. 450) respectively. Conclusion viewing stereoscopic video can cause a certain degree of visual fatigue. The changes of HFC value and response quantity were measured by AA-1 instrument, which can objectively reflect the degree of adjusting tension and visual fatigue.
【作者单位】：首都医科大学附属北京同仁医院北京同仁眼科中心北京市眼科研究所眼科学与视觉科学北京市重点实验室;
【基金】：科技部支撑计划项目(2011BAH15B08;2012BAH05F05;2012BAI23B07) 首都卫生发展科研专项项目(2011-1016-06)
【分类号】：R774

【相似文献】