JHSM

Journal of Health Sciences and Medicine (JHSM) is an unbiased, peer-reviewed, and open access international medical journal. The Journal publishes interesting clinical and experimental research conducted in all fields of medicine, interesting case reports, and clinical images, invited reviews, editorials, letters, comments, and related knowledge.

EndNote Style
Index
Original Article
Comparison of subjective and objective accommodation amplitude values
Aims: Comparison of accommodation amplitude values measured using autorefractometer, push up and minus lens technique. Material and
Methods: In this randomized, prospective study, both eyes of 75 healthy individuals between the ages of 15 and 40 were included in the study. They were divided into 5 groups as 15-20 age group 1, 21-25 age group 2, 26-30 age group 3, 31-35 age group 4, 36-40 age group 5 To measure the accommodation amplitude, the minus lens and push up technique were used as subjective methods, and the autorefractometer Tonoref III was used as the objective. The correlation between the measurement methods and the reproducibility of the autorefractory measurements were evaluated. In addition, changes in accommodation measurements with age, gender and pupil diameter changes were investigated.
Results: The mean accommodation amplitude values were 4.86±1.73 D in the minus lens technique, 8.79±4.58 D in the push up technique, and 2.77±1.93 D in the autorefractometer measurement. Autorefractometer accommodation amplitude values were found to decrease significantly with age (p=0.000). It was seen that the correlation between autorefractometry and subjective methods, minus lens and push up was significant and correlated (p=0.000, r=0.47, p=0.001, r=0.28, respectively). Intraclass correlation coefficients of Tonoref III accommodation amplitude were found to be 0.935.
Conclusion: Objective accommodation amplitude measurements made using Tonoref III were found to be correlated with subjective methods, but lower values were detected compared to subjective methods.


1. Glasser A, Kaufman PL. The mechanism of accommodation inprimates. Ophthalmology 1999; 106: 863-72.
2. Hofstetter HW. A comparison of Duane’s and Donder’s tables ofthe amplitude of accommodation. Am J Optom Arch Am AcadOptom 1944; 21: 345-62.
3. Win-Hall DM, Glasser A. Objective accommodationmeasurements in prepresbyopic eyes using an autorefractor andan aberrometer. J Cataract Refract Surg 2008; 34: 774-84.
4. León A, Estrada JM, Rosenfield M. Age and the amplitudeof accommodation measured using dynamic retinoscopy.Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 2016; 36: 5-12.
5. Küchle M, Seitz B, Langenbucher A, et al. AccommodativeIntraocular Lens Study Group. Comparison of 6-month resultsof implantation of the 1CU accommodative intraocular lens withconventional intraocular lenses. Ophthalmology 2004; 111: 318-24.
6. Chen Y, Zhang C, Ding C, et al. Repeatability of two subjectiveaccommodative amplitude measurements and agreement with anobjective method. Clin Exp Optom 2019; 102: 412-7.
7. Anderson HA, Stuebing KK. Subjective versus objectiveaccommodative amplitude: Preschool to presbyopia. Optom VisSci 2014; 91: 1290-301.
8. Küçük B, Sırakaya E. Minus Lens Tekniği ve Otorefraktometreile Ölçülen Subjektif ve Objektif Akomodasyon AmplitüdüDeğerlerinin Karşılaştırılması. MN Oftalmoloji 2020; 27: 16-21.
9. Khan A, Petropoulos IN, Ponirakis G, Malik RA. Visualcomplications in diabetes mellitus: beyond retinopathy. DiabetMed 2017; 34: 478-84.
10. Adnan, Efron N, Mathur A, et al. Amplitude of accommodationin type 1 diabetes. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2014; 55: 7014-8.
11. Satgunam P, Datta S, Sumalini R. Near vision in individuals withDown syndrome: a vision screening study. Eye (Lond) 2019; 33:1254-60.
12. Cerman E, Akkaya Turhan S, Eraslan M, Kahraman Koytak P,Kilinc O, Tanridag T. Topiramate and accommodation: Doestopiramate cause accommodative dysfunction? Can J Ophthalmol2017; 52: 20-5.
13. Orman B, Benozzi G. Pharmacological strategies for treatingpresbyopia. Current Opinion in Ophthalmology 2021; 32: 319-23.
14. Anderson HA, Hentz G, Glasser A, Stuebing KK, Manny RE.Minus-lens-stimulated accommodative amplitude decreasessigmoidally with age: a study of objectively measuredaccommodative amplitudes from age 3. Invest Ophthalmol VisSci 2008; 49: 2919-26.
15. Wold JE, Hu A, Chen S, Glasser A. Subjective and objectivemeasurement of human accommodative amplitude. J CataractRefract Surg 2003; 29: 1878-88.
16. Hashemi H, Nabovati P, Yekta AA, et al. Amplitude ofaccommodation in an 11- to 17-year-old Iranian population. ClinExp Optom 2017; 100: 162-6.
17. Yekta A, Khabazkhoob M, Hashemi H, et al. Binocular andAccommodative Characteristics in a Normal Population.Strabismus 2017; 25: 5-11.
18. Lara F, Bernal-Molina P, Fernández-Sánchez V, López-Gil N.Changes in the objective amplitude of accommodation with pupilsize. Optom Vis Sci 2014; 91: 1215-20.
19. Ozulken K, Kiziltoprak H. Objective Accommodation AmplitudeMeasurements Using a New Autorefractometer Device. BeyogluEye J 2019; 4: 149-55.
20. Koo TK, Li MY. A Guideline of Selecting and Reporting IntraclassCorrelation Coefficients for Reliability Research. J Chiropr Med2016; 15: 155-63.
21. Weng CC, Hwang DK, Liu CJ. Repeatability of the amplitude ofaccommodation measured by a new generation autorefractor.PLoS One 2020; 15: e0224733.
Volume 6, Issue 2, 2023
Page : 263-267
_Footer