不同眼保健操防控学生近视效果比较

目的 比较上海版传统眼保健操和北京改良版眼保健操防控学生近视的效果,为进一步探讨防治学生近视措施的制定提供依据.方法 选取上海市某学校三年级6个班级160名学生,随机分为上海版对照组、上海版督导组、北京版督导组进入试验观察,观察期为1.5a.3组均于基线和终期进行视力检查和散瞳验光.结果 3组学生近视新发率为:上海版对照组15.6％,上海版督导组15.0％,北京版督导组27.3％,差异无统计学意义(x2=3.35,P=0.19)；散瞳屈光度变化均值3组依次为:上海版对照组(0.64±0.65)D,上海版督导组(0.75±0.65)D,北京版督导组(0.75±0.71)D,差异无统计学意义(F=0.45,P=0.64).结论 2种眼保健操防控近视的效果差异不明显,加强做操过程督导对提高眼保健操作用的效果不明显.应尽快研讨、补充其他干预措施.

Comparative study of the effectiveness of two kinds of eye exercises on myopia among students

Objective To compare the effectiveness of 2008 Beijing modified eye exercises and Shanghai traditional eye exercises on the progression of myopia in students.Methods With random cluster sampling,160 children aged 8 years were included and divided into three groups.Students in group A were arranged to perform Shanghai traditional eye exercises,while students in group B performed Shanghai traditional eye exercises under the supervision and students in group C performed 2008 Beijing modified eye exercises under the supervision.Observation period was 1.5 years.Uncorrected visual acuity and cycloplegic refraction measurement were conducted at baseline and final.Results The Incidence of myopia in the three groups were: Group A 15.8%,group B 15.0%,group C 27.3%,the difference was not statistically significant(χ2= 3.35,P = 0.19).The changes of the cycloplegic refraction in the three groups were: Group A(0.64±0.65) D,group B(0.75±0.65) D,group C(0.75±0.71) D,and the difference was not statistically significant(F = 0.45,P = 0.64).Conclusion In the observation period,the effectiveness of two kinds of eye exercises has no significant difference.Eye exercises should not be simply linked to myopia prevention and control.