7 research outputs found

    Sensitivity of Chaos Measures in Detecting Stress in the Focusing Control Mechanism of the Short-Sighted Eye

    Get PDF
    yesWhen fixating on a stationary object, the power of the eye’s lens fluctuates. Studies have suggested that changes in these so-called microfluctuations in accommodation may be a factor in the onset and progression of short-sightedness. Like many physiological signals, the fluctuations in the power of the lens exhibit chaotic behaviour. A breakdown or reduction in chaos in physiological systems indicates stress to the system or pathology. The purpose of this study was to determine whether the chaos in fluctuations of the power of the lens changes with refractive error, i.e. how short-sighted a subject is, and/or accommodative demand, i.e. the effective distance of the object that is being viewed. Six emmetropes (EMMs, non-short-sighted), six early-onset myopes (EOMs, onset of short-sightedness before the age of 15), and six late-onset myopes (LOMs, onset of short-sightedness after the age of 15) took part in the study. Accommodative microfluctuations were measured at 22 Hz using an SRW-5000 autorefractor at accommodative demands of 1 D (dioptres), 2 D, and 3 D. Chaos theory analysis was used to determine the embedding lag, embedding dimension, limit of predictability, and Lyapunov exponent. Topological transitivity was also tested for. For comparison, the power spectrum and standard deviation were calculated for each time record. The EMMs had a statistically significant higher Lyapunov exponent than the LOMs ( 0.64±0.330.64±0.33 vs. 0.39±0.20 D/s0.39±0.20 D/s ) and a lower embedding dimension than the LOMs ( 3.28±0.463.28±0.46 vs. 3.67±0.493.67±0.49 ). There was insufficient evidence (non-significant p value) of a difference between EOMs and EMMs or EOMs and LOMs. The majority of time records were topologically transitive. There was insufficient evidence of accommodative demand having an effect. Power spectrum analysis and assessment of the standard deviation of the fluctuations failed to discern differences based on refractive error. Chaos differences in accommodation microfluctuations indicate that the control system for LOMs is under stress in comparison to EMMs. Chaos theory analysis is a more sensitive marker of changes in accommodation microfluctuations than traditional analysis methods

    Effect of blur adaptation on blur sensitivity and discrimination in emmetropes and myopes

    No full text
    NoThe purpose of this article is to determine whether blur adaptation influences blur sensitivity and blur discrimination thresholds in young adult myopes and emmetropes. In addition, to determine whether there is a differential effect of blur adaptation on blur sensitivity and discrimination between refractive error groups. Proximal and distal blur sensitivity thresholds and blur discrimination thresholds were measured under cycloplegia with a Badal optometer in 24 young adult subjects (8 emmetropes [EMM], 8 early-onset myopes [EOM], and 8 late-onset myopes [LOM]). Adaptation to 1 D of myopic refractive blur was then undertaken for 30 minutes. Blur sensitivity and discrimination thresholds were then remeasured. After blur adaptation, blur sensitivity, and blur discrimination thresholds were found to be elevated. Blur adaptation had a significant effect on distal blur sensitivity threshold, with the largest effect being observed in the EOMs. Mean changes in distal blur sensitivity thresholds were EMMs +0.03 ± 0.14 D, EOMs +0.30 ± 0.21 D, and LOMs +0.08 ± 0.13 D. Adaptation to a degraded stimulus modifies the blur detection mechanisms of the visual system in young adults. Depth of focus is expanded by prolonged exposure to defocus. EOMs are more susceptible to this phenomenon than are LOMs and EMMs

    The effect of image resolution of display types on accommodative microfluctuations

    No full text
    PURPOSE: To determine whether accommodative microfluctuations (AMFs) are affected by the image resolution of the display type being observed. The effect of refractive error is also examined. METHODS: Twenty participants, (10 myopes and 10 emmetropes) observed a target on four different displays: paper, smartphone, e‐reader and visual display unit screen (VDU), whilst their accommodative responses were measured using a continuous recording infrared autorefractor. The accommodative response and AMF measures comprising low frequency components (LFC), high frequency components (HFC) and the root mean square (RMS) of the AMFs were analysed. RESULTS: A significant increase in LFC power was observed for the paper stimulus when compared to the VDU and smartphone conditions. Myopes demonstrated a significantly higher LFC and mean accommodative response compared to emmetropes across the four displays. A significant difference in the mean AR between the displays with the lowest and highest resolution was found. A higher mean AR was found with higher resolution of the image. The HFC and RMS accommodation were not affected by display type. CONCLUSION: The mean accommodative response and the mean LFC power appear to respond differently depending on the type of display in use. Higher resolution devices showed a reduced lag of accommodation to the accommodative demand; however, this may cause a lead of accommodation in myopes for higher resolution display types

    Cognitive Demand and Accommodative Microfluctuations

    No full text
    Previous studies have shown cognition to have an influence on accommodation. Temporal variation in the accommodative response occurs during the fixation on a stationary target. This constantly shifting response has been called accommodative micro-fluctuations (AMFs). The aim of this study is to determine the effects of increasing task cognitive demand on the ocular accommodation response. AMFs for 12 myopes and 12 emmetropes were measured under three conditions of varying cognitive demand and comprising reading of numbers (Num), simple arithmetic (SA), and complex arithmetic (CA). Fast Fourier transforms were used to analyze the different frequency band components of the AMFs. Other aspects of AMFs including root mean square accommodation values and chaos analysis was applied. A repeated measures ANOVA revealed a significant main effect of cognition in the mean power of the high frequency component (HFC) (F2,44 = 10.03, p < 0.005). Pairwise analyses revealed that these differences exist between SA and CA tasks (p < 0.005) and the Num and CA (p < 0.005) tasks with the HFC power being the highest for the CA condition. It appears that the difficulty of a task does affect active accommodation but to a lesser extent than other factors affecting accommodation
    corecore