两种方法研究大学生群体优势眼与左/右利手间的关系(英文)

目的:评估大学生群体优势眼和左/右利手间的关系。方法:受试对象为179名大学生志愿者,平均年龄为19.4±1.6岁,其中女110名(61.5%),男69名(38.5%)。优势眼由Gndogˇan和McManus两种方法测得,左或右利手则由Edinburgh Handedness Inventory Oldfield和McManus法确定,t检验评估实验的可信度。结果:Gndogˇan法测得受试者中110人(61.5%)为右眼优势,69人(38.5%)为左眼优势,无性别差异。McManus法重测相同受试者,则右/左眼优势分别为128人(71.5%)和51人(28.5%)。两法测得的结果相关,一致度κ=0.256(P<0.01)。女性受试者中,Gndogˇan法测得右/左眼优势分别为62人(56.4%)和48人(43.6%),McManus法测得的结果为右/左眼优势分别为74人(67.3%)和36人(32.7%)。Fisher检验两法测得的结果相关(P<0.05),一致度κ=0.239(P<0.01)。男性受试者中,Gndogˇan法测得右/左眼优势为48人(69.6%)和21人(30.3%),Mc-Manus法检测为54人(78.3%)和15人(21.7%)。Fisher检验两法测得结果相关(P>0.05),一致度κ=0.239(P<0.01)。Oldfield和McManus法分别测得右利手比例为91.6%(n=164)和91.1%(n=163),两者间有较高的一致度κ=0.753(P<0.01)。McManus法检测出的优势眼和左或右利手间的统计学相关性具有显著性意义(Fisher检测P<0.017;一致度评分phi=0.193(P<0.05)。结论:大学生以右利手为主,McManus法检测发现右利手似乎与有眼优势更为相关。左或右利手和优势眼似乎是研究大脑功能不对称性和大脑偏侧型的最可靠的方法。     

两种方法研究大学生群体优势眼与左／右利手间的关系

目的：评估大学生群体优势眼和左／右利手间的关系。方法：受试对象为179名大学生志愿者,平均年龄为19.4±1.6岁,其中女110名（61.5％）,男69名（38.5％）。优势眼由Gǔndogan和McManus两种方法测得,左或右利手则由Edinburgh Handedness Inventory Oldfield和McManus法确定,t检验评估实验的可信度。结果：Gǔndogan法测得受试者中110人（61.5％）为右眼优势,69人（38.5％）为左眼优势,无性别差异。McManus法重测相同受试者,则右／左眼优势分别为128人（71.5％）和51人（28.5％）。两法测得的结果相关,一致度K=0.256（P〈0.01）。女性受试者中,Gǔndogan法测得右／左眼优势分别为62人（56.4％）和48人（43.6％）,McManus法测得的结果为右／左眼优势分别为74人（67.3％）和36人（32.7％）。Fisher检验两法测得的结果相关（P〈0.05）,一致度,（=0.239（P〈0.01）。男性受试者中,Gǔndogan法测得右／左眼优势为48人（69.6％）和21人（30.3％）,McManus法检测为54人（78.3％）和15人（21.7％）。Fisher检验两法测得结果相关（P〉0.05）,一致度K=0.239（P〈0.01）。Oldfield和McManus法分别测得右利手比例为91.6％（n=164）和91.1％（n=163）,两者间有较高的一致度κ=0.753（P〈0.01）。McManus法检测出的优势眼和左或右利手间的统计学相关性具有显著性意义（Fisher检测P〈0.017;一致度评分phi=0.193（P〈0.05）。结论：大学生以右利手为主,McManus法检测发现右利手似乎与有眼优势更为相关。左或右利手和优势眼似乎是研究大脑功能不对称性和大脑偏侧型的最可靠的方法。     

Study on dominant eye measurement

AIM: To examine a new performance test for detecting eye dominance by testing and re-testing with two different methods of the same subjects for comparing and discussing the reliabilities of these tests. METHODS: A total of 179 university students (mean± SD: 19.37± 1.62 years) were voluntarily participate in this survey consisting of 110 females (61.5%) and 69 males (38.5%). Eye dominances were determined by two different methods which were named McManus and a Gündo?an tests. The reliability of the survey was examined using a test-retest method. RESULTS: Without sex difference, right eyes were found dominant in 128 (71.5 %) participants by McManus test. The same subjects were re-tested by Gündo an method, the right eye dominance were found in 110 (61.5%) subjects. The results of these two methods were related significantly by Fisher exact test(P<0.01), with an agreement score( k=0.256, P<0.001). In females, the right eye dominance was found in 74 (67.3%) and left eye was found in 36 (32.7%) by McManus test. When the same subjects were re-tested by G ndo an method, the right eye dominance was found in 62 (56.4%) and the left eye dominance was found in 48 (43.6%) subjects.McManus and Gündo?an methods results for females were related significantly by Fisher exact test ( P<0.05), with a weak agreement score ( k=0.239, P<0.01). In males, the right/left eye dominances were found respectively 54 (78.3%), 15(21.7%) by McManus test as they were found 48 (69.6 %), 21 (30.4 %) in the same participants when they were re-tested by Gündo?an method.χ ² test and Fisher exact test were used for the analysis of categorical data. The agreement between different methods was analyzed with Kappa statistics. Comparison of proportions was made by two proportions test. value less than 0.05 was considered as significant. CONCLUSION: Without gender difference and also in both females and males marked right eye dominance is observed. The right eye dominance is considering functional laterality may due to the dominance of left hemisphere instead of right hemisphere. It is an important topic for future research in laterality, and it may well become an important model system for future research."     

优势眼在青少年近视进展中的分析

目的：通过观察青少年近视进展过程中优势眼中左眼及右眼的占比和性别分布,优势眼及非优势眼近视程度及增长速度的差别,分析优势眼在近视进展中的特点。

方法：前瞻性研究。选取2020-02/05期间我院就诊的235例7～17岁青少年近视患者进行眼部结构检查排除各种眼病,并进行优势眼(卡洞法)测定及散瞳后综合验光,均配戴单焦框架眼镜矫正,1a后复测优势眼(卡洞法)及散瞳后综合验光。

结果：研究对象中,优势眼为右眼159例(67.7%),左眼76例(32.3%),优势眼与非优势眼的性别分布无差异(P>0.05); 优势眼与非优势眼近视等效球镜度数无差异(P>0.05); 优势眼与非优势眼近视增长程度无差异(P>0.05); 右眼及左眼分别为优势眼和非优势眼时,近视增长度及两眼间近视增长程度均无差异(P>0.05); 优势眼近视增长程度与双眼近视增长度数差异具有相关性(P<0.01)。

结论：青少年近视者中,优势眼以右眼为主,且无性别差异; 优势眼在近视程度和增长程度上无特异性表现,且优势眼不影响近视增长程度和双眼参差大小的变化,但优势眼近视增长速度可能会影响双眼屈光参差的程度。     

年龄相关性白内障及手术对老年人优势眼的影响

背景 年龄相关性白内障及其手术后优势眼的变化与患者视觉质量呈明显相关,但白内障术后患者优势眼的变化与视力改变的关系研究较少. 目的 观察年龄相关性白内障及白内障手术对老年人优势眼的影响.方法 采用系列病例观察研究方法.收集2011年12月至2012年4月在温州医科大学附属眼视光医院就诊的年龄相关性白内障患者87例,患者行白内障超声乳化摘出联合IOL植入术.患者按标准对数视力表最佳矫正远视力分组,双眼间视力差别≥2行者为A组,双眼间视力差别≤1行者为B组,分别于术前及术后1d、1周、1个月、3个月用卡洞法或拇指法检测患者优势眼的分布及变化情况,以MecNmar检验对术眼手术前后优势眼分布的差异进行统计学分析. 结果 患者术前LogMAR最佳矫正远视力中位数（M）值为0.40（0.00 ～ 1.40）,术后为0.00（-0.08～0.30）,差异有统计学意义（Z=-9.481,P=0.000）.A组42例患者中术前右眼为优势眼者24例,左眼18例;33例（占78.57％）患者白内障较轻的眼为优势眼,9例（占21.43％）白内障较重眼为优势眼;患者术后右眼为优势眼者31例,左眼者11例;42例患者中13例发生优势眼转变,其中10例由左眼变为右眼,3例由右眼变为左眼,4例优势眼不稳定.B组45例患者中,术前右眼为优势眼者27例,左眼优势眼者18例;患者中4例优势眼发生转变,3例由左眼变为右眼,1例由右眼变为左眼,5例优势眼不稳定.两组患者手术前、手术后优势眼的分布差异均无统计学意义（A组：P=0.092;B组：P=0.727）. 结论 年龄相关性白内障导致的屈光介质混浊可对优势眼产生影响,白内障术后屈光介质透明性改变会导致优势眼的转换.     

主视眼非视觉优势与视疲劳的相关性观察

目的探讨主视眼非视觉优势与视疲劳的相关性。方法符合视疲劳诊断标准的门诊患者共956例。用卡洞法确定患者的主视眼,进行视觉优势的确定并进行非视觉优势的原因分析,对主视眼及非主视眼的各视级视力进行统计学处理。结果右眼主视眼者为702例,占73.4%;左眼主视眼者为254例,占26.6%;视疲劳的原因中屈光不正包括屈光参差、角膜结膜病、玻璃体混浊及早中期白内障、斜视及隐斜4项占总量的50%,不明原因的约占8%;主视眼非视觉优势是引起视疲劳的重要因素,在本组中主视眼非视觉优势总计588例,占总视疲劳患者的61.5%,屈光不正包括屈光参差、角膜结膜病、玻璃体混浊及早中期白内障是引起主视眼非视觉优势的主要原因;主视眼及非主视眼的视力呈弧形分布,低视力级(0.5视力以下)及高视力级(0.9视力以上)的病例数(眼数)相对较少,0.6～0.8视力级的患者总计为1104只眼,占总数的57.74%,提示在0.6～0.8视力级视疲劳有高发趋势,0.8及以上视力段的主视眼非视觉优势眼为958只眼,约占总数的50%,此阶段的视力差表现的较为明显。经统计学处理,主视眼的视觉优势明显差于非主视眼(P<0.001),主视眼的非视觉优势在视疲劳的发生中有着临床意义。结论主视眼非视觉优势与视疲劳具有相关性。     

优势眼在近视及散光人群的分布与关系研究

目的：研究优势眼眼别在近视及散光人群的分布状况及相关关系。

方法：连续检测我院门诊380例验光患者,进行医学验光,利用卡洞法检测优势眼眼别,并记录年龄、性别、裸眼视力等相关资料,应用SPSS统计软件分析。

结果：(1)优势眼以右眼居多,总体占66.84%; 右眼屈光不正程度相对略高。(2)优势眼与性别、年龄、裸眼视力无显著相关(P>0.05)。(3)优势眼与屈光不正程度无显著相关,但在屈光参差较大组,优势眼的屈光不正程度较非优势眼大。(4)优势眼与散光程度无显著相关(P>0.05),但在双眼柱镜差值≥1D组,优势眼为散光度数较大眼仅占20%,比例明显偏离其他两组。

结论：较大的柱镜性屈光参差可能影响优势眼的选择,而较大的球镜性屈光参差也许只是优势眼选择的结果。     

大鼠视网膜Mller细胞受刺激后具有神经干细胞的特性

目的:研究并验证成年哺乳动物视网膜中Mller细胞经刺激后可以产生神经干细胞特性。方法:对6周龄VC大鼠右眼玻璃体腔内注射神经毒素混合液(含NMDA,kainate,FGF2和insulin)刺激Mller细胞,左眼玻璃体内注射PBS作为对照眼。1wk后取眼并分离Mller细胞体外原代纯化培养7d。流式细胞技术鉴定Mller细胞纯度,通过细胞免疫荧光组织化学和流式细胞技术鉴定神经干细胞标志物nestin在Mller细胞上的表达。结果:流式细胞分析结果显示,本实验分离培养的原代Mller细胞纯度可达96%以上;细胞免疫荧光组织化学显示激活后Mller细胞能表达nestin,流式细胞技术证明,激活后培养的细胞中表达nestin的细胞可达总细胞量的53.5%。结论:成年大鼠视网膜Mller细胞经神经毒素在体刺激后可以产生神经干细胞特性。     

准分子激光原位角膜磨镶术中瞳孔中心移位及眼球旋转的研究

目的探讨准分子激光原位角膜磨镶术(laser insitu keratomileusis,LASIK)患者术前检查位(坐位)与术中体位(卧位)改变引起眼球旋转的规律及瞳孔中心移位的特点。方法LASIK手术患者285例(565眼),术前在暗室坐位自然瞳孔状态下,应用wavescan wavefrontTM system进行波前像差检查和虹膜纹理识别,在LASIK术中卧位应用激光机进行虹膜定位追踪手术,显示瞳孔中心移位(565眼)及眼球旋转(562眼)情况。结果术中565眼全部发生了瞳孔中心移位,双眼均以鼻上方移位明显。右眼平均移位距离为(0.33±0.25)mm,左眼平均移位距离为(0.34±0.27)mm。双眼平均移位距离差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。556眼(98.9%)发生眼球旋转,右眼平均旋转3.80°±3.95°,左眼平均旋转2.40°±2.95°,右眼旋转度数大于左眼,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.01)。右眼外旋明显,左眼内外旋几率基本相当。结论LASIK术中眼球的旋转运动和瞳孔中心移位是普遍存在的,屈光手术医生应高度重视,在准分子激光手术中应注意眼球旋转及瞳孔中心移位所引起的偏中心切削和欠矫问...     

离焦诱导豚鼠近视眼视网膜超微结构及凋亡研究

目的：观察离焦诱导豚鼠近视眼视网膜超微结构特征及凋亡情况。
　　方法：将30只3周龄的三色豚鼠用-10.00 D硬性角膜接触镜( rigid gas permeable contact lens,RGP)对右眼进行离焦诱导,左眼不戴镜。3 wk后散瞳检影观察屈光度变化;电子透射显微镜观察视网膜超微结构特征;TUNEL免疫荧光染色检测视网膜细胞凋亡情况。
　　结果：右眼诱导前后屈光度差值为3.28±0.21D,左眼为1.55±0.23D,二者比较差异有显著统计学意义( P<0.01);电镜结果显示,3wk后诱导眼视网膜可见膜盘结构的水肿,部分脱落;线粒体肿胀变形,部分空泡化;内外核层细胞膜不规则收缩,核染色质不规则聚集等凋亡特征;TUNEL免疫荧光染色显示诱导眼视网膜细胞凋亡发生率为(2.42±1.24)%,对照眼为(0.29±0.08)%,二者比较差异有显著统计学意义(P<0.01)。
　　结论：在离焦诱导的豚鼠近视眼的形成过程中伴随着视网膜细胞的异常凋亡。     

Association between ocular dominance and refraction

PURPOSE: To investigate the association between ocular dominance and refraction. METHODS: A retrospective study of the cycloplegic refraction of 2453 consecutive patients with a mean age of 46 +/- 12 years (range: 18 to 79 years) was performed. One thousand one hundred fifty-seven (47%) patients were men and 1296 (53%) were women. Patients who had previous eye surgery, ocular disease, or > 2 lines of best spectacle-corrected visual acuity (BSCVA) difference between eyes were excluded. Motor ocular dominance was determined using the hole-in-the-card test. RESULTS: The right and left eyes were dominant in 67% (1650) and 33% (803) of patients, respectively. Males had a higher right eye dominance (70%) than females (65%) (P = .0168) with a mean cycloplegic spherical equivalent refracton (SE) of -2.12 diopters (D) and -2.38 D, respectively. This higher rate of right eye dominance in males was seen at all levels of SE refractive error. Mean BSCVA was 20/19 in both right and left eyes (P>.05) with a mean SE of -2.25 +/- 3.63 D and -2.26 +/- 3.66 D in the right and left eyes, respectively. Neither mean SE difference nor BSCVA difference between eyes was found to correlate with motor eye dominance. CONCLUSIONS: Gender appears to be a factor when testing ocular dominance but not SE refractive error. The hole-in-the-card dominance test is a method that is easy to perform for both patients and clinicians.     

Sex differences in the left and right hemifields of normal subjects with computerised static perimetry.

Results of routine perimetric testing of the left and right hemifields in normal subjects have been assumed to be symmetric although asymmetry due to hemispheric dominance has been established for other psychophysical tests. These asymmetries have sometimes been related to sex. With the advent of computerised static perimetry, subtle differences between the left and the right hemifields might be found that were not obvious before. This study investigated differences in retinal sensitivity between the hemifields and the role of sex and eye dominance. Forty three unequivocally right handed and right eye dominant normal adult volunteers, 24 females and 19 males, underwent Humphrey 24-2 testing, half beginning with the left eye, the other half with the right eye. The Peridata program was used to calculate decibel totals per hemifield. Four subjects were excluded because of poor cooperation or test artefacts. In females, the total of the left hemifield was significantly less than the right (p < 0.01) by a mean 18.2 (SD 24) dB equivalent to a difference of 0.34 dB per tested point. No significant difference in hemifields was found for males, between the sexes for both eyes combined, or between the two eyes for either sex. It was concluded that asymmetries in retinal sensitivity with respect to the vertical axis may be physiological and found in females, but not in males.     

近视儿童主导眼相关因素研究

目的:探讨近视儿童主导眼与屈光度、眼别、裸眼视力的关系。方法:随机抽取经散瞳检影验光后,待瞳孔恢复正常复诊配镜患儿99例,用卡洞法检查主导眼,进行分类统计分析。结果:在99例近视患儿中,以右眼为主导眼,即右型(Rtype)者占66.7%(66/99),两者比较差异有显著统计学意义(P=0.0001);当双眼屈光度不相等时,以屈光度相对较低眼为主导眼者42例(52.5%),两者比较差异无统计学意义(P=0.527);当双眼屈光度相等时,以右眼为主导眼,占68.4%,两者比较差异具有统计学意义(P=0.0231);在双眼裸眼视力不等64例中,以裸眼视力低眼为主导眼者34例(53.1%),两者差异无统计学意义(P=0.4795);在双眼裸眼视力相等35例中,右眼为主导眼29例(82.9%),两者比较差异极具统计学意义(χ2=30.2286,P<0.01)。结论:近视儿童主导眼以右型多见,主导眼与屈光度、裸眼视力高低的相关性差异无统计学意义。     

Eye laterality: a comprehensive analysis in refractive surgery candidates

Purpose: To explore eye laterality (higher refractive error in one eye) and its association with refractive state, spherical/astigmatic anisometropia, age and sex in refractive surgery candidates. Methods: Medical records of 12 493 consecutive refractive surgery candidates were filtered. Refractive error (subjective and cycloplegic) was measured in each subject and correlated with eye laterality. Only subjects with corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA) of >20/22 in each eye were enrolled to exclude amblyopia. Associations between eye laterality and refractive state were analysed by means of t‐test, chi‐squared test, Spearman’s correlation and multivariate logistic regression analysis, respectively. Results: There was no statistically significant difference in spherical equivalent between right (?3.47 ± 2.76 D) and left eyes (?3.47 ± 2.76 D, p = 0.510; Pearson’s r = 0.948, p < 0.001). Subgroup analysis revealed (I) right eye laterality for anisometropia >2.5 D in myopic (?5.64 ± 2.5 D versus ?4.92 ± 2.6 D; p = 0.001) and in hyperopic (4.44 ± 1.69 D versus 3.04 ± 1.79 D; p = 0.025) subjects, (II) a tendency for left eye cylindrical laterality in myopic subjects, and (III) myopic male subjects had a higher prevalence of left eye laterality. (IV) Age did not show any significant impact on laterality. Conclusions: Over the full refractive spectrum, this study confirmed previously described strong interocular refractive correlation but revealed a statistically significant higher rate of right eye laterality for anisometropia >2.5 D. In general, our results support the use of data from one eye only in studies of ocular refraction.     

Ocular dominance, laterality, and refraction in Singaporean children

PURPOSE: To explore the effect of dominance and laterality on refractive error and axial length. METHODS: Ocular dominance was assessed with the hole-in-the-card test in 543 children during their 2006 follow-up visits for the Singapore Cohort study Of the Risk factors for Myopia (SCORM). Data were compared to cycloplegic refractions and axial lengths measured by ultrasound. RESULTS: The spherical equivalent refraction was essentially the same between the right and left eyes, although there was a small but statistically significant longer axial length in the right eyes. Right and left ocular dominance was noted in 58% and 30% of the subjects, respectively, with 12% having no eye preference. There was no significant difference in spherical equivalent refraction (2.56 +/- 2.46 D [mean +/- SD] vs. -2.45 +/- 2.52 D, P = 0.22) or axial length (24.36 +/- 1.19 mm vs. 24.32 +/- 1.18 mm, P = 0.05) between dominant and nondominant eyes. In subjects with anisometropia >or=0.5 D, dominant eyes were more myopic in 52%. Dominant eyes, however, had less astigmatic power (-0.88 +/- 0.80 D versus -1.00 +/- 0.92 D; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Ocular laterality and dominance have no significant effect on spherical equivalent. All axial length and astigmatic differences were small and clinically insignificant. The study findings suggest that in Singaporean children, bias is not present in those investigations that restrict analyses to right or left eyes. Although there is no apparent association between refraction and ocular dominance in young Singaporean children, more research is needed to resolve the disparate results in existing reports.     

优势眼与近视的关系研究

目的 :研究优势眼眼别与其两眼中近视性屈光程度较大眼的眼别关系。方法 :16 5个受试者 ,按照双眼屈光参差的程度分双眼屈光无显著差异组、生理性屈光参差组与病理性屈光参差组三组。在医学验光基础上 ,结合简化的卡洞法与拇指法判别双眼中的优势眼眼别。结果 :①对于所有个体 ,优势眼眼别与双眼中近视性屈光程度稍大眼眼别显著相关 (Z =- 3.6 2 1,P <0 .0 0 0 1)。②双眼屈光无差异组优势眼眼别与其两眼中近视性屈光程度较大眼眼别显著相关 (P <0 .0 0 0 1) ,但在生理性屈光参差组与病理性屈光参差组 ,两者均无显著相关 (P >0 .0 5 )。③各组均以右优势眼居多 ,右眼屈光不正较大者居多。结论 :优势眼的选择可能早于双眼近视性屈光参差的发生 ,而近视性屈光参差可能影响优势眼的选择     

成年近视患者主视眼与调节因素间关系的研究

背景 主视眼是人类具有功能不对称行为的器官之一,它和非主视眼在很多方面的差异一直是基础研究和临床研究的热点,但基于成年近视患者调节功能方面的研究相对较少. 目的 研究成年近视患者主视眼和非主视眼与调节相关各因素之间的关系.方法 采用描述性系列病例观察的研究方法,纳入35例年龄为18～ 35岁、双眼屈光不正球镜度为-2.00 ～-10.00 DS、散光度≤1.50 DC且双眼屈光参差≤1.5 DS、最佳矫正视力(BCVA)≥1.0的单纯近视患者,采用卡洞法并结合拇指法判断主视眼的眼别,采用主观、客观综合验光法获得受检眼屈光不正的度数,用移近法测量单眼的调节幅度,以附加±0.50 D融合交叉柱镜(FCC)法测量受检眼的调节滞后情况,采用翻转法测量各眼的调节灵敏度. 结果 本组患者的主视眼与非主视眼调节幅度分别为(9.69 ±2.30)D和(9.60±2.37)D,调节灵敏度分别为(11.08±4.20) cpm和(10.63±4.60) cpm,调节滞后量分别为0和0.25 D,主视眼与非主视眼间的差异均无统计学意义(P=0.294、0.260、0.141).右眼为主视眼的患者双眼调节幅度分别为(9.48±2.29)D和(9.33±2.49)D,调节灵敏度分别为(10.50±4.70)cpm和(9.99±4.90) cpm,差异均无统计学意义(P=0.319、0.116),双眼调节滞后量的差异无统计学意义(P=0.590).左眼为主视眼的患者双眼调节幅度分别为(9.91±2.35)D和(9.88±2.26)D,调节灵敏度分别为(10.70±3.77) cpm和(11.25±4.27) cpm,差异均无统计学意义(P=0.749、0.295),双眼调节滞后量间的差异无统计学意义(P=0.238).结论 对于无或有较小屈光参差的成年近视患者,主视眼和非主视眼在调节幅度、调节灵敏度及调节准确性方面无差别.     

偏光镜介导的双眼注视状态下调节反应差异性研究

目的：：探讨利用偏振效应构建的3种不同注视方式下双眼调节反应的差异。方法：前瞻性对照研究。选取15名正视眼志愿者入选本试验(年龄18~38岁,男6名,女9名)。利用偏光镜和液晶显示器的偏振特性,设置3种不同的注视方式：(1)右眼能看到屏幕显示的视标,左眼无法看到;(2)右眼无法看到屏幕视标,左眼能看到;(3)双眼均能看到屏幕视标。使用红外电脑验光仪分别测量注视距离为5、2、1、0.5、0.33m时的客观验光值(以等效球镜计算),计算所有受试者在以上3种注视方式下的调节反应量。采用重复测量的方差分析和t检验比较不同注视方式下双眼调节反应的差异。结果：采用注视方式(1)(2)时,双眼在各种调节刺激下产生的调节反应有明显差异,其中使用眼(能看到屏幕视标眼)的调节反应均比未使用眼(不能看到屏幕视标眼)大(P<0.05)。采用注视方式(3)时,各种调节刺激下的双眼调节反应无明显差异(P>0.05)。结论：双眼开放状态下,经常被使用眼的睫状肌处于相对紧张状态,较少使用眼则处于相对放松状态。这种调节反应的不均衡性,很可能是促发近视发生的危险因素。