Abstract:Objective:To explore the effects of conflicting stimuli generated by different chromatic lights on visual display terminal (VDT) on accommodative response and microfluctuation of myopes and emmetropes, and to investigate the possible relationship between chromatic light, accommodation and the development and progression of myopia.Methods:A non-randomized controlled trial was conducted.Forty-one subjects aged 22 to 30 years old were enrolled, including 19 emmetropes in emmetropic group and 22 myopes in myopic group.The subjects had the normal color vision and no ocular organic diseases.The interventions were screens of different colors.There were 7 chromatic light conditions, including 3 monochromatic lights (red, green, blue), 3 bichromatic lights (red+ green, red+ blue, green+ blue) and 1 polychromatic light (white=red+ green+ blue). Subjects were asked to look at a black E target on a VDT at a distance of 33 cm for more than 20 seconds.The background color of the VDT was changed randomly in the 7 chromatic light conditions.The accommodative responses were recorded with the Grand Seiko WAM-5500 automatic infrared refractor every 0.2 seconds and the accommodative microfluctuation was calculated as the standard deviation of the accommodative response.Accommodative response and accommodative microfluctuation under different chromatic light conditions were compared.This study adhered to the Declaration of Helsinki.The study protocol was approved by the Ethics Committee of the First Affiliated Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine (No.2019-1564). Written informed consent was obtained from each subject.Results:No statistically significant difference was found in the accommodative response between the two groups ( Fgroup=2.626, P=0.113). There was a statistically significant difference under different chromatic light conditions between the two groups ( Flight=39.070, P<0.01). There were similar trends in the effects of various color lights in both groups, with the largest accommodative response under monochromatic red light, followed by the bichromatic light containing red light, and then the smallest accommodative response under monochromatic blue light, and the differences were statistically significant (all at P<0.05). The accommodative microfluctuations under red, green, blue, red+ blue, red+ green, blue+ green and white light conditions were (0.142±0.033), (0.128±0.038), (0.131±0.043), (0.139±0.039), (0.127±0.034), (0.131±0.043) and (0.139±0.042)D in emmetropic group, and (0.178±0.043), (0.164±0.043), (0.159±0.039), (0.174±0.042), (0.166±0.036), (0.159±0.031) and (0.174±0.035)D in myopic group, respectively, showing statistically significant differences between them ( Fgroup=12.146, P<0.01; Flight=2.782, P<0.05). The accommodative microfluctuations under the 7 light conditions were higher in myopic group than in emmetropic group, and the differences were statistically significant (all at P<0.05). In myopes, the accommodative microfluctuation was the largest under red light, which was significantly larger than that under blue light, and was the smallest under blue+ green light (all at P<0.05). There was no significant difference in the accommodative microfluctuation between bichromatic light and its two monochromatic lights, or between the polychromatic light (white light) and its three monochromatic lights (all at P>0.05). There was no significant effect of various chromatic lights on the accommodative microfluctuation in emmetropic group (all at P>0.05). Conclusions:The accommodative microfluctuation is greater in myopes than in emmetropes.The stimuli produced by long-wavelength light cause larger accommodative microfluctuation, while conflicting stimuli generated by different chromatic lights do not increase accommodative microfluctuation.

Investigate the AC/A ratios measured by Gradient method in people with normal binocular vision

Measurement of the AC/A ratio by different methods

The Disparity in Accommodative Amplitude under Different Monochromatic Lights and the Correlation with Refractive State

Comparison of Different Techniques to Assess the Near Accommodative Responses

Anterior segment biometry during accommodation imaged with ultralong scan depth optical coherence tomography.

Clinical Investigation on AC/A Ratio in Intermittent Exotropia Coexisting with Ametropia

Binocular Accommodative Function in Patients with Intermittent Exotropia

[Accommodation to Monochromatic Targets in People with Different Color Vision Statuses].

[АComparative analysis of the magnitude of the distance and lens-induced objective accommodative response in patients with different refraction]

Comparison of the effects of different chromatic lights on accommodative response and microfluctuation in myopes and emmetropes

Nonaccommodative Factors of Refractive Accommodative Esotropia.

Accommodation and Binocular Vision in Children with Myopic Anisometropia

Accommodation response fluctuation in myopia during sustained near work

Effect of the +0.75D Addition Lenses on Accommodative Lag and Accommodative Fluctuation in Myopes

Anterior Segment Biometry with Phenylephrine and Tropicamide During Accommodation Imaged with Ultralong Scan Depth Optical Coherence Tomography

[Study of Corrected Visual Performance and Vision Quality].

Comparison of changes in ocular aberrations with accommodation and accommodative facility

Comparison of Four Methods for Measuring Heterophoria and Accommodative Convergence over Accommodation Ratio

Study on the Changes in Astigmatism with Accommodation

Biometry Of Anterior Segment Of Human Eye On Both Horizontal And Vertical Meridians During Accommodation Imaged With Extended Scan Depth Optical Coherence Tomography

The impact of accommodation function on the difference between noncycloplegic and cycloplegic refraction in adult myopes