» Articles » PMID: 25602235

Subjective Versus Objective Accommodative Amplitude: Preschool to Presbyopia

Overview
Journal Optom Vis Sci
Date 2015 Jan 21
PMID 25602235
Citations 30
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Purpose: This study compared subjective and objective accommodative amplitudes to characterize changes from preschool to presbyopia.

Methods: Monocular accommodative amplitude was measured with three techniques in random order (subjective push-up, objective minus lens stimulated, and objective proximal stimulated) on 236 subjects aged 3 to 64 years using a 1.5-mm letter. Subjective push-up amplitudes were the dioptric distance at which the target first blurred along a near-point rod. Objective minus lens stimulated amplitudes were the greatest accommodative response obtained by Grand Seiko autorefraction as subjects viewed the stimulus at 33 cm through increasing minus lens powers. Objective proximal stimulated amplitudes were the greatest accommodative response obtained by Grand Seiko autorefraction as subjects viewed the stimulus at increasing proximity from 40 cm up to 3.33 cm.

Results: In comparison with subjective push-up amplitudes, objective amplitudes were lower at all ages, with the most dramatic difference occurring in the 3- to 5-year group (subjective push-up, 16.00 ± 4.98 diopters [D] vs. objective proximal stimulated, 7.94 ± 2.37 D, and objective lens stimulated, 6.20 ± 1.99 D). Objective proximal and lens stimulated amplitudes were largest in the 6- to 10-year group (8.81 ± 1.24 D and 8.05 ± 1.82 D, respectively) and gradually decreased until the fourth decade of life when a rapid decline to presbyopia occurred. There was a significant linear relationship between objective techniques (y = 0.74 + 0.96x, R2 = 0.85, p < 0.001) with greater amplitudes measured for the proximal stimulated technique (mean difference, 0.55 D).

Conclusions: Objective measurements of accommodation demonstrate that accommodative amplitude is substantially less than that measured by the subjective push-up technique, particularly in young children. These findings have important clinical implications for the management of uncorrected hyperopia.

Citing Articles

Age-Related Changes in Lens Elasticity Contribute More to Accommodative Decline Than Shape Change.

Pu Y, Hoshino M, Uesugi K, Yagi N, Wang K, Pierscionek B Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2025; 66(1):16.

PMID: 39775694 PMC: 11717130. DOI: 10.1167/iovs.66.1.16.


Classification of accommodative insufficiency by monocular subjective push-up test is poorly predictive of monocular objective amplitudes in children and young adults.

Anderson H, Parks S, Kulp M, Mitchell G Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 2024; 45(1):14-22.

PMID: 39555785 PMC: 11629849. DOI: 10.1111/opo.13419.


Impact of proxymetacaine on the dynamics of cyclopentolate in White 6- to 7-year-olds.

Doyle M, ODwyer V, Harrington S Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 2024; 45(1):4-13.

PMID: 39535408 PMC: 11629844. DOI: 10.1111/opo.13421.


Prevalence of hyperopia in school-aged children in eastern Mediterranean region: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Alrasheed S, Challa N Saudi J Ophthalmol. 2024; 38(3):243-251.

PMID: 39465016 PMC: 11503982. DOI: 10.4103/sjopt.sjopt_47_23.


Comparison of the accommodative amplitude measured with and without the use of a specialised accommodative rule in children.

Hashemi H, Nabovati P, Khabazkhoob M, Yekta A, Emamian M, Fotouhi A BMJ Open Ophthalmol. 2024; 9(1).

PMID: 39306331 PMC: 11733077. DOI: 10.1136/bmjophth-2024-001829.


References
1.
Klimek D, Cruz O, Scott W, Davitt B . Isoametropic amblyopia due to high hyperopia in children. J AAPOS. 2004; 8(4):310-3. DOI: 10.1016/j.jaapos.2004.05.007. View

2.
Taylor J, Charman W, ODonnell C, Radhakrishnan H . Effect of target spatial frequency on accommodative response in myopes and emmetropes. J Vis. 2009; 9(1):16.1-14. DOI: 10.1167/9.1.16. View

3.
Read S, Buehren T, Collins M . Influence of accommodation on the anterior and posterior cornea. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2007; 33(11):1877-85. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrs.2007.06.048. View

4.
Hyvarinen L, Nasanen R, Laurinen P . New visual acuity test for pre-school children. Acta Ophthalmol (Copenh). 1980; 58(4):507-11. DOI: 10.1111/j.1755-3768.1980.tb08291.x. View

5.
Atchison D, Capper E, McCabe K . Critical subjective measurement of amplitude of accommodation. Optom Vis Sci. 1994; 71(11):699-706. DOI: 10.1097/00006324-199411000-00005. View