ABSTRACT
The temporal dynamics of ocular aberrations are important for the evaluation of, e.g. the accuracy of aberration estimates, the correlation to visual performance, and the requirements for real-time correction with adaptive optics. Traditionally, studies on the eye's dynamic behavior have been performed monocularly, which might have affected the results. In this study we measured aberrations and their temporal dynamics both monocularly and binocularly in the relaxed and accommodated state for six healthy subjects. Temporal frequencies up to 100 Hz were measured with a fast-acquisition Hartmann-Shack wavefront sensor having an open field-of-view configuration which allowed fixation to real targets. Wavefront aberrations were collected in temporal series of 5 s duration during binocular and monocular vision with fixation targets at 5 m and 25 cm distance. As expected, a larger temporal variability was found in the root-mean-square wavefront error when the eye accommodated, mainly for frequencies lower than 30 Hz. A statistically-significant difference in temporal behavior between monocular and binocular viewing conditions was found. However, on average it was too small to be of practical importance, although some subjects showed a notably higher variability for the monocular case during near vision. We did find differences in pupil size with mono- and binocular vision but the pupil size temporal dynamics did not behave in the same way as the aberrations' dynamics.
Subject(s)
Accommodation, Ocular/physiology , Corneal Topography/methods , Refraction, Ocular/physiology , Refractive Errors/diagnosis , Vision, Binocular/physiology , Vision, Monocular/physiology , Adult , Humans , Models, StatisticalABSTRACT
The dependence of the ocular aberrations on gaze has been studied in three eyes using a fast-acquisition, Hartmann-Shack wavefront sensor. Although there were some trends in the change of some aberration terms with gaze, the changes of most Zernike coefficients were smaller than their variability at each individual gaze position, due to the combined effects of microfluctuations of accommodation, eye movements, tear film dynamics, and measurement noise. For our particular experimental dataset, the confidence level at which the null hypothesis (i.e. that the aberrations do not change significantly with gaze) can be rejected is very low. Further advances in the study of the dependence of eye aberrations with gaze will require a tighter control of the sources of aberration variability at each individual gaze position.
