摘要目的：:分析受检者在阅读快速序列视觉呈现方式（RSVP）与其他不同类型视标进行实时调节反应及调节微波动测量差异。方法：:前瞻性研究。收集2019年4—10月期间在温州医科大学附属眼视光医院就诊的近视患者33例，年龄15~28（22.1±4.8）岁，等效球镜度（SE）为（-3.81±1.67）D。试验视标分为以下4类：RSVP、随机字符RSVP、马耳他视标和文本窗。每组视标试验时间为5 min，使用Grand Seiko WAM-5500红外验光仪进行实时的调节反应、调节微波动的测量。使用单因素方差分析比较受检者阅读或者注视不同视标时调节参数的差异，使用配对 t检验比较试验初期10 s内与5 min内平均调节反应值的差异。 结果：:5 min试验显示，与RSVP、随机字符RSVP和文本窗比较，马耳他视标调节反应最低，差异均有统计学意义（ t=2.45， P=0.016； t=2.57， P=0.011； t=3.85， P<0.001）；注视马耳他视标时，调节变异度大于阅读RSVP和文本窗，差异均有统计学意义（ t=4.32， P<0.001； t=2.93， P=0.04）。调节微波动能量分析显示，与RSVP相比，注视马耳他视标时低频区能量明显增高（ t=30.32， P<0.001）；与RSVP相比，阅读文本窗时中频及高频区能量明显增高（ t=32.41， P<0.001； t=38.26， P<0.001）。RSVP、随机字符RSVP及马耳他视标在最初10 s的调节反应均高于5 min内调节反应的均值（ t=2.30， P=0.028； t=2.45， P=0.020； t=3.71， P=0.001）。 结论：:阅读或注视不同类型的视标时，人眼的调节反应及调节微波动存在差异。阅读或注视持续一段时间后，调节反应会随着时间发生变化，最初的测量结果无法完全代表持续阅读或者注视时的调节反应。

abstractsObjective::To compare the real-time accommodative response and accommodative microfluctuations during sustained reading/viewing of rapid serial visual presentations (RSVP) and different target presentations.Methods::This was a prospective study. A total of 33 subjects aged from 15 to 28 years were included at Eye Hospital, Wenzhou Medical University from April to October in 2019. The mean age of the subjects was 22.1±4.8 years and the mean spherical equivalent was -3.81±1.67 D. Accommodative response and microfluctuations were measured using the Grand Seiko WAM-5500 auto-refractor while the subject was continuously tested with different targets for 5 minutes. The targets were as follows: RSVP (a rapid serial visual presentation paradigm), Rand-RSVP (a random word rapid serial visual presentation paradigm), Maltese Cross (a target with a Maltese cross) and Windows Text (a window of reading material for 5 minutes). The accommodative response and microfluctuations for different types of visual targets were compared. One-way ANOVA was used to compare the differences in accommodation while reading or viewing the different visual targets. A paired t-test was used to compare the difference between the initial 10-second measurement and 5-minute accommodative response. Results::While viewing the Maltese Cross, all subjects had a lower mean accommodative response ( t=2.45, P=0.016; t=2.57, P=0.011; t=3.85, P<0.001) and a larger accommodative variability ( t=4.32, P<0.001; t=1.86, P=0.065; t=2.93, P=0.04). Power spectrum analysis showed that subjects exhibited greater power at low temporal frequencies while viewing the Maltese Cross ( t=30.32, P<0.001), and more power at medium and high temporal frequencies when reading the Window Text ( t=32.41, P<0.001; t=38.26, P<0.001). Subjects had a higher accommodative response in the first 10 seconds than the average accommodative response within 5 minutes when reading/viewing RSVP, random RSVP and Maltese Cross ( t=2.30, P=0.028; t=2.45, P=0.020; t=3.71, P=0.001). Conclusions::Different presentation paradigms produce different accommodative responses and microfluctuations. Accommodative response in the early stage varied after sustained reading/viewing during continuous testing.