中华眼视光学与视觉科学杂志
中華眼視光學與視覺科學雜誌
중화안시광학여시각과학잡지
CHINESE JOURNAL OF OPTOMETRY OPHTHALMOLOGY AND VISUAL SCIENCE
2013年
8期
463-466
,共4页
向武%冯涓涓%陈咏冲%廖瑞端
嚮武%馮涓涓%陳詠遲%廖瑞耑
향무%풍연연%진영충%료서단
低视力%助视器%阅读康复
低視力%助視器%閱讀康複
저시력%조시기%열독강복
Low vision%Low vision aids%Reading rehabilitation
目的 明确新型非球面光学助视器与电子助视器在低视力学生阅读康复方面的作用,为临床及低视力康复工作提供参考.方法 前瞻性临床对照研究.选取广州市培英职业学校的低视力学生30例,年龄(21.1±3.0)岁.每名受检者分别在不使用助视器、使用新型非球面光学助视器和便携式电子助视器3种条件下阅读.记录不同条件下受检者的持续时间、阅读距离、阅读速度、换行时间和错误率.数据比较采用单因素方差分析,两两比较采用Bonferroni法检验.结果 不使用助视器、使用新型非球面光学助视器和便携式电子助视器在阅读持续时间[(4.35±2.82)min vs.(7.27±4.50)minvs.(10.71±3.09)min,F=4.60,P＜0.01],阅读距离[(7.44±4.40)cm vs.(13.38±7.07)cm vs.(20.97±6.84)cm,F=11.21,P＜0.01],阅读速度[(35.64±24.01)字/min vs.(49.41±24.96)字/min vs.(65.59±20.03)字/min,F=13.77,P＜0.01]、换行时间[(1.52±1.13)s vs.(2.24±1.25)s vs.(3.42±0.94)s,F=7.40,P＜0.01]和错误率[(10.34±11.01)％vs.(5.84±3.61)％ vs.(5.26±2.72)％,F=1.79,P＜0.05)]上的差异有统计学意义.其中便携式电子助视器在阅读持续时间、阅读距离、阅读速度上均优于新型非球面光学助视器(P＜0.0167);新型非球面光学助视器在阅读持续时间、阅读距离、阅读速度上优于不使用助视器(P＜0.0167)；在错误率上便携式电子助视器、不使用助视器与新型非球面光学助视器相比差异无统计学意义(P＞0.0167),便携式电子助视器错误率低于不使用助视器(P＜0.0167).换行时间上便携式电子助视器、新型非球面光学助视器长于不使用助视器(P＜0.0167),便携式电子助视器长于新型非球面光学助视器(P＜0.0167).结论 助视器对于低视力学生在阅读上有很大的帮助；便携式电子助视器总体上明显优于新型非球面光学助视器.
目的 明確新型非毬麵光學助視器與電子助視器在低視力學生閱讀康複方麵的作用,為臨床及低視力康複工作提供參攷.方法 前瞻性臨床對照研究.選取廣州市培英職業學校的低視力學生30例,年齡(21.1±3.0)歲.每名受檢者分彆在不使用助視器、使用新型非毬麵光學助視器和便攜式電子助視器3種條件下閱讀.記錄不同條件下受檢者的持續時間、閱讀距離、閱讀速度、換行時間和錯誤率.數據比較採用單因素方差分析,兩兩比較採用Bonferroni法檢驗.結果 不使用助視器、使用新型非毬麵光學助視器和便攜式電子助視器在閱讀持續時間[(4.35±2.82)min vs.(7.27±4.50)minvs.(10.71±3.09)min,F=4.60,P＜0.01],閱讀距離[(7.44±4.40)cm vs.(13.38±7.07)cm vs.(20.97±6.84)cm,F=11.21,P＜0.01],閱讀速度[(35.64±24.01)字/min vs.(49.41±24.96)字/min vs.(65.59±20.03)字/min,F=13.77,P＜0.01]、換行時間[(1.52±1.13)s vs.(2.24±1.25)s vs.(3.42±0.94)s,F=7.40,P＜0.01]和錯誤率[(10.34±11.01)％vs.(5.84±3.61)％ vs.(5.26±2.72)％,F=1.79,P＜0.05)]上的差異有統計學意義.其中便攜式電子助視器在閱讀持續時間、閱讀距離、閱讀速度上均優于新型非毬麵光學助視器(P＜0.0167);新型非毬麵光學助視器在閱讀持續時間、閱讀距離、閱讀速度上優于不使用助視器(P＜0.0167)；在錯誤率上便攜式電子助視器、不使用助視器與新型非毬麵光學助視器相比差異無統計學意義(P＞0.0167),便攜式電子助視器錯誤率低于不使用助視器(P＜0.0167).換行時間上便攜式電子助視器、新型非毬麵光學助視器長于不使用助視器(P＜0.0167),便攜式電子助視器長于新型非毬麵光學助視器(P＜0.0167).結論 助視器對于低視力學生在閱讀上有很大的幫助；便攜式電子助視器總體上明顯優于新型非毬麵光學助視器.
목적 명학신형비구면광학조시기여전자조시기재저시역학생열독강복방면적작용,위림상급저시력강복공작제공삼고.방법 전첨성림상대조연구.선취엄주시배영직업학교적저시역학생30례,년령(21.1±3.0)세.매명수검자분별재불사용조시기、사용신형비구면광학조시기화편휴식전자조시기3충조건하열독.기록불동조건하수검자적지속시간、열독거리、열독속도、환행시간화착오솔.수거비교채용단인소방차분석,량량비교채용Bonferroni법검험.결과 불사용조시기、사용신형비구면광학조시기화편휴식전자조시기재열독지속시간[(4.35±2.82)min vs.(7.27±4.50)minvs.(10.71±3.09)min,F=4.60,P＜0.01],열독거리[(7.44±4.40)cm vs.(13.38±7.07)cm vs.(20.97±6.84)cm,F=11.21,P＜0.01],열독속도[(35.64±24.01)자/min vs.(49.41±24.96)자/min vs.(65.59±20.03)자/min,F=13.77,P＜0.01]、환행시간[(1.52±1.13)s vs.(2.24±1.25)s vs.(3.42±0.94)s,F=7.40,P＜0.01]화착오솔[(10.34±11.01)％vs.(5.84±3.61)％ vs.(5.26±2.72)％,F=1.79,P＜0.05)]상적차이유통계학의의.기중편휴식전자조시기재열독지속시간、열독거리、열독속도상균우우신형비구면광학조시기(P＜0.0167);신형비구면광학조시기재열독지속시간、열독거리、열독속도상우우불사용조시기(P＜0.0167)；재착오솔상편휴식전자조시기、불사용조시기여신형비구면광학조시기상비차이무통계학의의(P＞0.0167),편휴식전자조시기착오솔저우불사용조시기(P＜0.0167).환행시간상편휴식전자조시기、신형비구면광학조시기장우불사용조시기(P＜0.0167),편휴식전자조시기장우신형비구면광학조시기(P＜0.0167).결론 조시기대우저시역학생재열독상유흔대적방조；편휴식전자조시기총체상명현우우신형비구면광학조시기.
Objective To study the effectiveness of 2 different low vision aids for reading rehabilitation:the aspheric optical aid and the portable electronic aid; to provide guidelines for visual rehabilitation.Methods This was a prospective case-control study.Thirty students were selected from the Peiying Vocational School to participate in the study.Subjects read material under 3 conditions:no low visual aid (NL),the new aspheric optical low vision aid (NA) and the portable electronic low vision aid (PE).The reading order was randomly established before the test.A voice recorder was used to record and measure reading distance when subjects read the material.After each trial,students were asked which low vision aid was better.Reading duration,reading distance,reading speed,line changing time and error rate were calculated.Finally,SPSS 13.0 software was used to analyze the data from the trials in a one-way ANOVA.Results There were significant differences in reading duration (4.35±2.82 min vs.7.27±4.50 min vs.10.71±3.09 min,F=4.60,P＜0.01),reading distance (7.44±4.40 cm vs.13.38±7.07 cm vs.20.97±6.84 cm,F=11.21,P＜0.01),reading speed (35.64±24.01 words/min vs.49.41±24.96 words/min vs.65.59±20.03 words/min,F=13.77,P＜0.01),line changing time (1.52±1.13 s vs.2.24±1.25 s vs.3.42±0.94 s,F=7.40,P＜0.01)and error rate (10.34±11.01％ vs.5.84±3.61％ vs.5.26±2.72％,F=1.79,P=0.03) under the 3 conditions.PE was significantly superior to NA in reading duration (P＜0.0167),reading distance (P＜0.0167),and reading speed (P＜0.0167).NA was significantly superior to NL in reading duration (P＜0.0167),reading distance (P＜0.0167),and reading speed (P＜0.0167).PE was not significantly superior to NA (P＞0.0167) and NA was not significantly superior to NL in error rate (P＞0.0167).However,PE was significantly superior to NL (P＜0.0167).PE took significantly longer than NL (P＜0.0167) and NA (P＜0.0167) for line changing time.NA took significantly longer than NL for line changing time (P＜0.0167).Conclusion Low vision aids are very helpful for low vision students in reading,and the portable electronic low vision aid was superior to the new aspheric low vision aid in reading rehabilitation.
