头戴式显示与桌面显示对数字眼疲劳的影响差异研究  

Study on the difference of digital eye strain impact between head mounted display and desktop display

作　　者：张伟[1] 甄毅[1] 杜丽华[1] 王宁利[1] Zhang Wei;Zhen Yi;Du Lihua;Wang Ningli(Beijing Institute of Ophthalmology,Beijing Tongren Hospital,Capital Medical University,Beijing Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology and Visual Science,National Engineering Research Center for Ophthalmology,Beijing 100730,China)

机构地区：[1]首都医科大学附属北京同仁医院、北京市眼科研究所眼科学与视觉科学北京市重点实验室国家眼科诊断与治疗工程技术研究中心,100730

出　　处：《眼科》2022年第6期429-434,共6页Ophthalmology in China

基　　金：北京大数据精准医疗高精尖创新中心计划。

摘　　要：目的对比头戴沉浸式显示(HMD)与桌面开放式显示(DP)在短期阅读使用时对人眼数字眼疲劳的影响差异。设计二阶段交叉设计试验研究。研究对象18~21岁在校大学生42人。方法受试者按完全随机法分为两组,每组21人。第一组先使用HMD、后使用DP阅读相同的文字40分钟,中间休息30分钟;第二组相反顺序使用。用开放式自动验光仪检查阅读前、后的屈光度,并计算调节反应。用Likert量表记录观看前、后的主观眼疲劳评分。根据受试者每分钟的阅读速度与正确率的乘积计算阅读效率。主要指标阅读前后屈光度、矫正视力、调节反应、眼疲劳量表评分、阅读效率。结果使用HMD,阅读前后屈光度分别为-0.045(-0.56,0.31)D和-0.025(-0.45,0.31)D(P=0.144);调节反应均为滞后,滞后量分别为(1.13±0.57)D和(1.16±0.62)D(P=0.612);矫正视力分别为1.00(0.8,1.2)和1.00(0.8,1.2)(P=0.978);阅读后眼疲劳主观评分2.50(1.00,6.00)高于阅读前的0.50(0,3.25)(P=0.004)。使用DP,阅读前后屈光度分别为-0.070(-0.50,0.23)D和-0.020(-0.50,0.26)D(P=0.305);调节滞后量分别为(1.09±0.58)D和(1.13±0.59)D(P=0.491);矫正视力分别为1.00(0.8,1.0)和1.00(0.8,1.0)(P=1.000);阅读后眼疲劳主观评分3.00(1.00,6.25)明显高于阅读前的0(0,3.00)(P<0.001)。将HMD组与DP组引起的眼部参数变化及阅读效率进行交叉比较,两设备引起的屈光度变化量无统计学差异(P=0.126),调节滞后变化量无差异(P=0.962),矫正视力变化量无差异(P=0.894),眼疲劳评分变化量无差异(P=0.160)。HMD组阅读效率(20.11±6.09)低于DP组(22.01±6.91)(P=0.009)。结论与DP显示相比,HMD在40分钟的阅读使用时未引起更强的数字眼疲劳。Objective To compare the influence difference of digital eye strain between head mounted display(HMD)and desktop display(DP)when using for reading application.Design Two stage cross-over design study.Participants 42 college students aged 18-21 years old.Methods The subjects were randomly divided into two groups,21 cases in each group.The first group used HMD first,and then used DP to read the same text for 40 minutes,with an interval of 30 minutes.The second group was in the reverse order.An open-field autorefractor was used to measure the refraction and accommodative lag before and after reading.Likert scale was used to record subjective visual fatigue scores before and after reading.Reading efficiency was defined as a product of reading accuracy and reading rate per minute.Main Outcome Measures Refraction,corrected visual acuity,accommodative lag,and visual fatigue scale score,reading efficiency.Results Using HMD,the diopter before and after reading was-0.045(-0.56,0.31)D and-0.025(-0.45,0.31)D,respectively(P=0.144),and the accommodative lag was(1.13±0.57)D and(1.16±0.62)D,respectively(P=0.612).The corrected visual acuity was 1.00(0.8,1.2),1.00(0.8,1.2),respectively(P=0.978).There were no significant differences in refraction,accommodative lag and corrected visual acuity before and after reading with HMD.The subjective score of visual fatigue before and after reading was 0.50(0,3.25),2.50(1.00,6.00),respectively(P=0.004).The mean value of visual fatigue score increased after reading,and the difference was statistically significant.Using DP,the diopter before and after reading was-0.070(-0.50,0.23)D and-0.020(-0.50,0.26)D,respectively(P=0.305),the accommodative lag was(1.09±0.58)D and(1.13±0.59)D,respectively(P=0.491),and the corrected visual acuity was 1.00(0.8,1.0),1.00(0.8,1.0),respectively(P=1.000).There were no significant differences in refraction,accommodative lag and corrected visual acuity.The subjective score of visual fatigue before and after reading was 0(0,3.00),3.00(1.00,6.25),respectively(P<0.

关 键 词：数字眼疲劳 头戴显示 调节滞后 

分 类 号：R77[医药卫生—眼科]