Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 12, 2026
Comparison of Three Clinical Stereoscopic Methods for Measuring Binocular Visual Function During Amblyopic Treatment in Unilateral Amblyopia
Published on: September 27, 2024
Comparison of three monocular methods for measuring accommodative stimulus-response curves
Yunyun Chen1,2, Wanqing Jin1,2, Zhili Zheng1
1School of Ophthalmology and Optometry, Wenzhou Medical University, Wenzhou, Zhejiang, China.
Purpose:
The aim was to evaluate the repeatability of dynamic measurement of the accommodative stimulus-response curve (ASRC) at three different dioptric speeds using a modified instrument and its agreement with two other methods.
Methods:
Twenty-nine adults (23.5 ± 2.0 years) were enrolled in the study. ASRC was measured monocularly using three methods: dynamic and static measurement using a motorised Badal system mounted on an open-field auto-refractor (WAM-5500, Grand Seiko Co., Ltd, Japan) and the minus lens technique. Dynamic measurements were conducted at three dioptric stimulus speeds to simulate continuous stimuli for ASRC (0.25, 0.40 and 0.55 D/s), with three repetitions for each speed. All three types of ASRCs were fitted with third-degree polynomial equations. The slope and objective accommodative amplitude of the ASRC were analysed.
Results:
The repeatability of objective accommodative amplitude worsened as the speed of the stimuli increased. The repeatability of the slope was best at a speed of 0.40 D/s and worst at 0.55 D/s. The measurement method significantly influenced the objective accommodative amplitude values and slope (both, p < 0.001). The minus lens technique yielded the highest amplitude of accommodation (6.21 ± 0.84 D) and steepest slope (1.11 ± 0.14), followed by the static Badal method (5.60 ± 0.83 D and 0.89 ± 0.09 D). The objective accommodative amplitude decreased with increasing speed during dynamic measurements. There was no difference between the slopes at 0.25 D and 0.40 D/s (p > 0.05) and the slope was lowest at 0.55 D/s.
Conclusion:
The accommodative stimulus-response curve values are method-dependent and the significant differences between three methods used to determine the ASRC based on slope and accommodative amplitude indicate that these methods are non-interchangeable. Using dynamic measurements, accommodative behaviour varies with the speed of dioptric-change of the stimulus. A speed of 0.40 D/s appears to be the best compromise in terms of time, results and repeatability for dynamic ASRC measurement.
