April 2010
Volume 51, Issue 13
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   April 2010
Influence of Peripheral Defocus on Accommodation
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • B. Drobe
    R & D Singapore, Essilor International, Singapore, Singapore
  • B. Hong
    R & D Singapore, Essilor International, Singapore, Singapore
  • K. Ian
    R & D Singapore, Essilor International, Singapore, Singapore
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships  B. Drobe, Essilor Int., E; Essilor Int., P; B. Hong, Essilor Asia Pacific, E; K. Ian, Essilor Asia Pacific, E.
  • Footnotes
    Support  None.
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science April 2010, Vol.51, 1725. doi:https://doi.org/
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      B. Drobe, B. Hong, K. Ian; Influence of Peripheral Defocus on Accommodation. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2010;51(13):1725. doi: https://doi.org/.

      Download citation file:

      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

  • Supplements

Purpose: : To determine the influence of peripheral defocus on lag of accommodation and its fluctuation.

Methods: : Accommodation was measured continuously at 5 Hz in 10 Chinese young adults by means of an open field infrared autorefractor (Grand Seiko Autorefractor / Keratometer WAM-5500, Grand Seiko Co. Ltd., Hiroshima, Japan). Subjects were reading a Chinese text character by character at 2Hz on a LCD screen at 33 cm while wearing ophthalmic lenses (Plano, -2.00D, +4.00D, -4.00D) with a central 8 mm hole. Lens order was randomized. 10 seconds of measurements were used for analysis for each lens. Measurements were repeated 3 times during a single session.

Results: : Lags of accommodation were 0.80 ± 0.10D, 0.72 ± 0.09D, 0.79 ± 0.09D, 0.76 ± 0.10D and intra-individual standard deviations of accommodation 0.18 ± 0.02D, 0.15 ± 0.01D, 0.16 ± 0.01D, 0.16 ± 0.01D respectively for Plano, -2.00D, +4.00D, -4.00D lenses. Lens type did not have any influence on lag of accommodation (p=0.20) or on its fluctuation (p=0.29).

Conclusions: : Peripheral defocus had no short time influence on lag of accommodation or its fluctuation. These findings seem to confirm that the effect of peripheral defocus on emmetropization is a local retinal phenomenon rather than a consequence of an increased lag of accommodation.

Keywords: accommodation • myopia 

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.