• Journal of Korean Ophthalmic Optics Society
• /
• v.9 no.2
• /
• pp.223-231
• /
• 2004

In most previous studies, the assessment of accommodative convergence to accommodative stimulus (AC/A) ratio was commonly made by measuring gradient AC/A ratio. This study deals with the proximal convergence/accommodation(PC/A)ratio measured by comparing values of the gradient AC/A ratio and the calculated AC/A ratio to prevail the clinical use of the AC/A ratio. Visual acuities of All 124 subjects had been corrected to at least 1.0 with either eye through their habitual refractive correction and the MEM dynamic retinoscopy was performed to estimate their accommodative response. And then the PC/A ratio was calculated by making use of the calculated AC/A ratio and the gradient AC/A ratio. This study showed that the difference between the mean calculated AC/A ratio and the mean gradient AC/A ratio in subgroups may be attributable to proximal convergence. Consequently, further studies on proximity cues including the PC/A ratio could be helpful to prevail the clinical use of the AC/A ratio.

• Proceedings of the Optical Society of Korea Conference
• /
• 2004.02a
• /
• pp.182-183
• /
• 2004

• Journal of Korean Ophthalmic Optics Society
• /
• v.19 no.3
• /
• pp.345-351
• /
• 2014

Purpose: The accommodative response and the near horizontal phoria were examined with additional spherical power to analyze the stimulus and response AC/A ratios that suggest reference data for the binocular vision. Methods: The open-field autorefractometer (Nvision-K 5001, Shin nippon) and modified thorington method (MIM card; Muscle Imbalance Measure card, Bernell) at 40 cm were utilized to measure the accommodative response and the near horizontal phoria for 81 persons ($20.89{\pm}1.92$ years old) with additional spherical power. The stimulus and the response AC/A ratios were calculated by gradient AC/A method. Results: The exophoria group showed the highest accommodative response ($1.92{\pm}0.26D$) at 40 cm, followed by orthophoria group and esophoria group($1.72{\pm}0.26D$ and $1.62{\pm}0.42D$, respectively) Meanwhile, the esophoria group showed the biggest ocular deviation for the near ($23.24{\Delta}$) followed by the orthophoria group and exophoria group ($19.76{\Delta}$ and $15.14{\Delta}$, respectively). The biggest difference of the stimulus and the response AC/A ratios was $1.72{\Delta}$ for the exophoria group with -2.00 D, while the one was $3.43{\Delta}$ for the esophoria group with +1.00 D. There was a significant difference between AC/A ratios for the exophoria group with -2.00 D, -1.00 D and the esophoria group with +3.00 D, +2.00D, +1.00D and -1.00D. Conclusions: The difference between stimulus and response AC/A was greater when increased minus spherical power for the exophoria group, while it was greater when increased plus spherical power for the esophoria group. Furthermore, the difference for the esophoria group was a greater than the one for the exophoria group.

• Journal of Korean Ophthalmic Optics Society
• /
• v.11 no.3
• /
• pp.267-273
• /
• 2006

For this study, we measured heterophoria, Calculated AC/A, Gradient AC/A of pre & post LASIK operation. In case of heterophoria, the results showed that orthophoria 2.78% decreased, exophoria 2.78% increased on pre & post op distance phoria and exophoria 5.55% increased, esophoria 5.55% decreased on pre & post op near phoria. In case of AC/A, Calculated AC/A significantly decreased as 0.36 at AC/A and accommodation decreased as 1.25D (p<0.05). It showed that Gradient AC/A decreased 0.34 and PC/A increased 0.09 but they didn't show significant difference.

• Journal of Korean Ophthalmic Optics Society
• /
• v.16 no.4
• /
• pp.417-423
• /
• 2011

Purpose: This study was to investigate that near gradient AC/A ratio could be used to prescribe a patient with distance exophoria, we compared the difference between distance gradient AC/A ratio and near gradient AC/A ratio. Also, this thesis was to understand the relationship between calculated AC/A ratio and gradient AC/A ratio. Methods: Objective and subjective refractive error were corrected and we used Howell (3 m) chart for distance phoria tests and Howell-Kim (40 cm) chart for near phoria tests. The near gradient AC/A ratio and calculated AC/A ratio were used by Howell-Kim (40 cm) combined with +1.00 D, -1.00 D, +2.00 D and -2.00 D. Results: The average value of distance exophoria was 1.17${\pm}$1.17 $\Delta$, and the average value of near exophoria was 3.71${\pm}$2.80 $\Delta$ (t-test. p<0.001). The correlation of distance phoria with near phoria was little higher (r = 0.59, p < 0.001). Gradient AC/A ratios depending on measuring distance and stimulus were higher (r = 0.11~0.53. P < 0.001), when distance was shorter and stimulus to accommodation was more. Also, stimulus to accommodation by plus lens was higher than stimulus to accommodation by minus lens (paired t-test. p < 0.001). There was negative correlation between calculated AC/A ratio and gradient AC/A ratio. As the calculated AC/A ratio was higher, gradient AC/A ratio was lesser. Near gradient AC/A ratio was slightly higher than distance gradient AC/A ratio. Distance and near gradient AC/A ratio taken through the subjective -1.00 D were 1.30 $\Delta$/D and 1.68 $\Delta$/D(t-test. t=1.67, p < 0.001). Conclusions: There is negative correlation between calculated AC/A ratio and gradient AC/A ratio. Also, there is subtle difference between near gradient AC/A ratio and distance gradient AC/A ratio. Therefore, we need to measure distance gradient AC/A ratio when a practitioner prescribe glasses for a patient with distance exophoria.