摘要
目的 探讨不同色觉状态者对不同颜色调节刺激的调节反应以及色觉机制在不同色觉状态者调节控制中的作用.方法 病例-对照研究.87名受试者,其中包括17名红色觉异常,47名绿色觉异常和23名色觉正常者,平均年龄（20.0±4.4）岁,测试视标为红-黑或绿-黑的等亮度垂直方波视标（空间频率3周/度,对比度0.9）,通过Badal系统改变调节刺激水平（0.00 ～5.00 D）.采用开放视野的红外自动电脑验光仪测量调节反应.不同色觉组之间的比较及不同调节刺激水平之间的比较采用单因素方差分析,两两比较采用LSD检验.红-绿视标的比较采用配对t检验.结果 红-黑视标测试,调节刺激4.00D时,红色觉异常组（AR=1.98 D）较色觉正常组（AR =2.55 D）调节反应低（P =0.031）.当调节刺激为3.00、4.00、5.00D时,绿色觉异常组的调节反应分别为1.23、1.89、2.40 D,均低于色觉正常组（P＜0.05）.绿-黑视标测试,当调节刺激为3.00和4.00D时,红色觉异常组调节反应分别为1.13、1.80 D,均较色觉正常组低（P＜0.05）;当调节刺激为3.00、4.00、5.00D时,绿色觉异常组的调节反应分别为1.21、1.65、2.36 D,均低于色觉正常组（P＜0.05）.红、绿色觉异常组对两种颜色各个刺激水平下的调节反应差异均无统计学意义.不同颜色视标对调节的影响：当调节刺激分别为2.00、3.00、5.00D时,红色觉异常组对红色视标的调节反应优于绿色视标（t=-2.81,-4.55,-3.15;P＜0.05）.绿色觉异常只在调节刺激为4.00D时,对红色视标的调节反应优于绿色视标（t=-2.19,P＜0.05）.当调节刺激分别为2.00、4.00、5.00D时,色觉正常组对红色视标的调节反应优于绿色视标（t=-2.57,-2.67,-2.15;P＜0.05）.结论 色觉异常者的调节滞后量较色觉正常者大,证明色觉机制参与调节的控制.色觉各组受试者均表现为对红色视标的反应优于绿色视标或对红/绿视标反应无差异,这可能与长波长光对调节和正视化的影响有关.
Objective To compare the accommodation response （AR） to monochromatic targets in subjects with different color vision statuses,and to investigate the role of color vision in the control of accommodation and emmetropization.Methods It was a case-control study.Accommodation was measured with a dynamic infrared optometer while subjects [17 protans,47 deutans,and 23 normals; mean age：（20.0 ± 4.4） years] viewed a （1） red on black or （2） green on black vertical square-wave gratings of isoluminance （3 cycles/deg; 0.9 contrast） in a Badal optic system.The grating stepped 1.00 D towards the eye from an initial position of 0 D until 5.00 D.Results With red-black targets,the AR in the protans （AR =1.98 D） was worse than that in the normals （AR =2.55 D） when the accommodation stimulus （AS）was 4.00 D （LSD,P =0.031）.The AR in the deutans were worse than that in the normals when the AS was3.00,4.00,and5.00 D （3.00 D：1.23 Dvs.1.69 D,P=0.002; 4.00 D：1.89 D vs.2.55 D,P=0.002; 5.00 D：2.40 D vs.3.17 D,P =0.003）.With green-black targets,the AR in the protans were worse than that in the normals when the AS was 3.00 and 4.00 D （3.00 D：1.13 D vs.1.61 D,P =0.004; 4.00 D：1.80 D vs.2.34 D,P =0.021）.In the deutans,the AR was worse with stimuli of 3.00,4.00,and5.00 D （3.00D：1.21 Dvs.1.61 D,P=0.003;4.00 D：1.65 Dvs.2.34 D,P〈0.001;5.00 D：2.36 D vs.2.93 D,P =0.007）.No significant differences between the protans and deutans were found for all the stimulus conditions.In the protans,accommodation to red-black targets was better than that to green-black targets when the stimulus was 2.00,3.00,and 5.00 D （2.00 D：t =-2.81,P =0.013;3.00 D：t =-4.55,P 〈0.001 ; 5.00 D：t =-3.15,P =0.006）.In the deutans,accommodation to redblack targets was better than that to green-black targets when the stimulus was 4.00 D （t =-2.19,P =0.034）.In the normals,accommodation to red-black targets were better than that to green-black targets when the stimulus was 2.00,4.00,and 5.00 D （2.00 D：t =-2.57,P =0.017; 4.00 D,t =-2.67,P =0.014 ; 5.00 D：t =-2.15,P =0.043）.Conclusions Individuals with a color vision deficiency tend to have a larger accommodative lag than normals.Red targets tend to induce better accommodation response than green ones.Color vision may play a role in the control of accommodation and emmetropization.
出处
《中华眼科杂志》
CAS
CSCD
北大核心
2015年第1期15-19,共5页
Chinese Journal of Ophthalmology
基金
国家自然科学基金青年基金项目（NSFC61108050）
关键词
色觉缺陷
色觉
色觉试验
调节
眼
Color vision defects
Color vision
Color perception tests
Accommodation,ocular
